Exilon wrote:
Doh, it was unexpected, hence the reaction. I think you need to do a re-read. Mustilicor asked if someone had any objections, I said I had one: I wanted to end that discussion with you.
Wow, okay, so the two posts before that you did mention this desire of yours.
Sorry I guess for not deprehending this properly from a following post which ended with this:
Exilon wrote:
Civil had stated he was okay with the lynch, but I would have liked to hear his say before the twilight... Oh, well.
Which certainly reads as missing the pronoun/preposition '...his say on it' which would be '...his say on the lynch'. I suppose it could be a language difference, but when you mention me talking about the lynch and then repeat something similar, it's generally understood that there you are also talking about that group of thoughts (say about the lynch) not what I would have to say about our discussion.
Though I didn't have a chance to post, and Quintastic was wrong that play-style is a useless discussion, especially when it's not just about play-style.
And Mustilicor, as well, I didn't notice that it was a SIMUL so your explanation holds for that first quote, but you do talk with a very similar sentiment in subsequent posts.
Mustilicor wrote:
...Civil scum, you're taking my 'nooo' out of context. I objected to Quintastic hammering like that, but that wasn't what that particular post was about - it was playfully being exasperated there was something I needed to wait on. Quintastic posted at the same time as me and I hadn't seen his hammer at that point. Pay attention and please do not misquote me in the future.
Something which this explanation does not cover. In fact, you're basically misrepresenting my mistake of not noticing the times of a SIMUL as a defense of what I am saying, when it doesn't entirely.
I still think it's a valid point with your "fretting" posts, though obviously not with the first post.
And Exilon, I'm not sure I believe that your 'NOOOOO' was about getting a reply from me to your post, and not about the hammer of Andrius.
Exilon wrote:
I've been building a case since last day on someone.
Really, was that before or after I called you out for not being serious about any of your suspects?
Mustilicor wrote:
[Civil's] focus on Exilon disturbs me a little consider Exilon is the only strong town read I've had all game
That's all well and good. But both you and Exilon seem to be riding Samp's heels already D-3, and he's my strongest town read.
Asking for the claim now, when it was pretty simple to assume there isn't a cop, does give the appearance of trying to score a few townie-points. But as a single thing, and not a gross pattern or tendency of his this game, I don't think it says a whole lot.
Mustilicor wrote:
The reason I point it out is because I have a hard time understanding going with an evidenceless gut vote in light of a slip-up that took being challenged twice to get an explanation satisfactory at face value.
I could see with your other point, that Samp would feel he had been wrong 3 times, if he at all went to operating under Quintastic=Doctor. That apparent trouble he had with Antifinity's dismal hopes for a successful lynch is still bothersome, as he does turn around and accept Antifinity's 1-scum explanation a super-mega easily.
Samp wrote:
It's not just that Antifinity's explanation is satisfactory at face value, it's that he didn't answer with the typical scum motives: dishonestly avoiding suspicion or flinging it back at someone else. Instead Anti accepted it, which is usually the last thing scum wants to do.
It was satisfactorily ridiculous. I have to say again, that those "motive's", more accurately->inclinations, are more personality based than alignment based. I think I had offered this opinion of mine earlier as well. Sure he accepted that he had made a mental error, but it would have been difficult to deny. You really expected him as scum to go, "Nuh-uuuh!"? What he did do was accept it and then try to answer it. I don't think that goes very far in this case saying if the explanation is a lie or not.
Decent observations raised about Samp, but his early play still sounds pretty solid to me, and compared to Exilon's 2-day fluff-game, Antifinity's fumbling, and your questionable twilight behavior...yeah, right now compared to that, nevermind.
Exilon wrote:
It obviously made the scum think it was now unclear who Quintastic (more on Quintastic's Case later) was going to protect, which IS why he would be the smartest and safest Noght kill out of everyone else.
Anyone feel free to call WIFOM on this, but doesn't the above point from Exilon sort of clear Mustilicor? Or do you think it's possible that Exilon is mentioning this for that purpose?
Antifinty wrote:
I am totally lost at this point.
All things considered, this is a reasonable place for me to believe you are at. Though, as perhaps Mustilicor can understand, I'm fairly uneasy that you are the third person 'suspicious' of Samp. 3 total, and you are the third.
Exilon, I am assuming Samp is your case you mentioned.
Exilon wrote:
Yeah, because I wasn’t the one who posted half a page of reasoning/theory to vote Andrius without any kind of reasoned counter-argument. You were. /sarcasm
You're right, I posted more than a half page with an FoS. Citing things like his hammering doubt, his list of reasoning which wasn't really made up of reasons to think MMM was scum, and his apparent change in pllay-style overnight.
I'll freely admit that the hammer may have tipped me off or pulled me in that direction. I'm not about to deny that, nor should there be any reason for me to. Yet you're saying that the hammer wasn't a main reason for you looking at Andrius. Which is a pretty ridiculous thing to say.
I was going to discuss your answers here, many of which I have issues with and aren't prepared to accept, but this post has already taken a while, and I'm due at work shortly. But I'll finish up when I get home.
