Darox wrote:Spyrex is scum, Ooba is town, Josh is VI.
Given you have not mentioned Sprex once today I feel the need to ask – is he still scum in your eyes? Or was, as you put it at ISO 26 “totally random you guys”. If so why were you random voting well out of RVS?
Darox wrote:Cruelty needs to stop being scum.
Is cruelty still scum? Beyond NS (and I still assume CMAR) who do you find most suspicious?
VasudeVa wrote:I seem to have replaced into a extreme lurker spot. If my town reads ever found my predecessor's lurkiness malicious, feel free to ask. I think I can explain why she lurked like a mofo but I don't think I should yet.
Does the explanation have nothing to do with in-game but rely solely on easjo meta? Because otherwise the only other explanation you could offer is role-based. Given you specifically pointed out soft-claim / claim requests as something you didn’t like out of CMAR, myself, ooba I really would like to know if you are inviting requests for some variety of claim yourself. That would seem to be inconsistent. Note that I want nothing of a claim from you just information as to were your explanation comes from.
Zang wrote:Just because I have removed my vote doesn't mean I think he isn't scum, im going to see how his replacement handles things and then decide if I should vote for him. I also have a few minor suspicouns but nothing really voteworthy at the moment.
You don’t necessarily have to vote to act on your suspicions. You could work up some questions for those who are triggering your scum radar. In reviewing your ISO you really haven’t advanced any siginificant arguments or questions at players.
Your vote, up until you hammered hung on Darox for the significant amount of Day1. Specifically you said this regarding Darox versus Easjo –
Zang wrote:ooba wrote:easjo
- Easily the worst amongst the lurkers
- Active lurking: Has time to answer what a kiwi is, but not the questions posed to him on his previous analysis
- Hasn't taken a stance (Disregarding the previous post)
I disagree, Darox is the worst of the active lurkers. He still hadn't said why he thinks you (Ooba) are scum.
This was two days before the lynch was made. What changed about your suspicion or lack thereof for Darox that you make no mention of him after night?
@ Cruelty (and others using it as a main tent-pole of their case]– regarding the ISO lack of CMAR comment by Josh –
Cruelty wrote:if he never mentioned you, then it seems to me to be a reasonable conclusion that you're either so townie that he thought he had no chance of getting you lynched, or he didn't want you lynched.
Did you read through the Josh ISO yourself? He voted for Darox, ooba, Sprex, cruelty, ooba, Sprex and finally himself. The majority of his day Josh spent responding and reacting as opposed to actively questioning anyone. He was definitely on the defensive. Isn't just a reasonable an argument that he had little interaction with CMAR because CMAR didn't question / attack him? If so and you consider that the Mafia didn't know Josh's identity its poor logic to link him to Josh in this manner.
cruelty wrote:i thought magna's post was dubious but given i had no real reason to be suspicious of him at the time, it didn't seem worth getting into.
So you thought that one post was dubious enough to receive a vote but not actually discuss it? And you dropped a vote right out of Day 2 when you had no real reason to be suspicious?
Later today or Friday I’ll take a detailed look at NS’s contributions and decide if the case against him is strong enough to warrant a vote. If not cruelty will be receiving it for his general lack of scum-hunting, the quick-lynch comment and his resulting WIFOM defense.
"I am a leaf on the wind ... watch how I soar!"
Pretty much Geriatric game restricted at this point ... unless there are players I REALLY want to play with.