Oh.the silent speaker wrote:Hmm, plainly you're not familiar with it, then. The original "curious incident of the dog in the night-time" was a line from the Sherlock Holmes storySilver Blaze. When Watson protested that the dog did nothing in the night-time, Holmes responded that that was the curious incident.
Considering I never voted for spec/kleb but instead poked them with questions, I thought it was pretty clear I did not think lynching them (simply on the suspicion that theyCogito Ergo Sum wrote:I just re-read PJ's posts to check whether he had made it clear who he wanted lynched Yesterday. He had not. He only made it clear moments before the lynch, so I say my mistaken view that PJ wanted spec/kleb lynched is very much understandable.
Post 935 also caught my eye. In hindsight I realize that that post may well have been meant as a sort of "shush, stop talking silly Glrok"-post.
Well, we both know Glrok is too good a player to just give out information willynilly as scum. I think Glrok's previous post at that point certainly gave us information. By being so direct and upfront about it you ensured Glrok would stop. If you had nudged him, maybe asked some critical questions about why he thought I was an SK, he might've unwittingly revealed more.Djelibeybi wrote:And I am going to need to see an explanation for your take on my Post 935. I was trying to get Glork totalkmore, so that I might be able to finger his partner(s). How did you get the impression I was "telling him to 'hush'"?
Well, we both know Glrok is too good a player to just give out information willynilly as scum. I think Glrok's previous post at that point certainly gave us information. By being so direct and upfront about it you ensured Glrok would stop. If you had nudged him, maybe asked some critical questions about why he thought I was an SK, he might've unwittingly revealed more.Djelibeybi wrote:And I am going to need to see an explanation for your take on my Post 935. I was trying to get Glork totalkmore, so that I might be able to finger his partner(s). How did you get the impression I was "telling him to 'hush'"?
That's why I said "critical questions why he thought I was the SK". Nitpicky questions about that post 933("but couldn't Nightson have been going for this?", sort of thing) is what I meant.Djelibeybi wrote:Look at Post 933, and then tell me I should have asked Glork "why he thinks you are the SK" in Post 935. From what I can tell, he is trying to present a "process of elimination" explanation. If I had asked him to explain why he thought you were SK, I guarantee he would have just said something like "try reading my last post".
This is, in essence, what I meant. Asking him questions is perfectly pro-town, but the way you asked them could only lead to him shutting up.Djelibeybi wrote:The fact is, Glork seemed to be in a "talkative" mood, so I figured I might be able to take advantage of that and get him to answer a question or two. In retrospect, I wish I had asked the questions one at a time instead of all at once, since he would have less time (while responding) to think about changing his answers or realizing it would probably be stupid of him to have answered my questions. If I had managed to get him in a direct conversation with me, I may have been able to get him to slip up or reveal something.
This question was not going to doCES wrote:Do you really think I would kill Ibby? I'd totally kill DGB and Coron, but certainly not Ibby. I might kill Fritz, but not twice.
Firstly, it did hush the player and not without reason.Djelibeybi wrote:Accusing somebody of "hushing another player" byasking questionsis about as dumb an accusation as I've seen.
