I pointed a FOS at Zakarum back in Post 218, and while he attempted toaddressed my concerns in Post 219, that post and posts subsequent have not eased my supsicions.
My second concern I outlined:
[i]In Post 218[/i] opie wrote:2. In Post 109, he votes for Bookitty. Rather than provide his own analysis or explanation, he adopt Elias_the_thief's explanation wholly.
I note this because:
(a) Elias_the_thief continued to maintain his vote for Bookitty for the same reasons in his first post of Day Two. [Post 167]
(b) Zakarum, on the other hand, seems to completely ignore her as a suspect without offering any comments or explanations why. Furthermore his points a finger of suspicion at mcpaltp [Post 156]; hasdgfs [Post 183]; myself [Post 183] and calls out Boggzie [Posts 175 and 211].
Elias_the_thief maintained a consistant position from Day One to Day Two, while Zakarum having adopted the same positioned switches positions and makes accusations of four other players in the span of a day and a half [Post 156 to Post 183]
Zakarum's response to this point:
[i]In Post 219[/i] Zakarum wrote: 2. I agreed with what Elias was saying and rather than just repeat what he said I quoted it. Like I said I don’t really know what to look for on day one and I felt Elias made a good point. The reason I was being suspicious or rather looked that way is because the way I think in my everyday off is by bouncing ideas off people. I have suspicions for every person I mentioned even though there isn’t much evidence I figured I would through out what I feel and think and maybe it would spark something in someone else. I mean this is a team effort I am just sharing ideas.
Elias_the_thief then asks for clarification on this point:
[i]In Post 222[/i] Elias_the_thief wrote: Zakarum: Do you still agree with the points I made today, or not? And if so, why have you made no serious mention of the possibility of Boo being scum today? If not, what was it that changed you mind?
To which Zakarum replied that he still agrees with the points made by Elias_the_thief in Post 167 but adds:
[i]In Post 225[/i] Zakarum wrote:The only thing different is that I fell more suspicious of Boggzie than of Bookitty.
The main reason is for pushing ryan very hard without strong evidence even after Bookitty stated that she got a pm regarding replacing into ryan's game.
What strikes me about that last statement is the part I italicized. That reason existed on Day One! Yet no mention of that concern on Day One. The only significant differance between Day One and Two is that ryan turned up town! I am infering, unless Zakarum wants to correct me, that ryan's status as town diminishes the case against Bookitty in his eyes. And this post seems to support that inference:
[i]In Post 148[/i] Zakarum wrote:Well.... does this mean Bookitty is off the hook or could she just have been trying to cover for herself by outing ryan.
Yet in Post 225 he says he agrees with Elias_the_thief's points in Post 167 where he argues that:
[i] In Post 167[/i] Elias_the_thief wrote:This logic still holds true, especially since Ryan was town
I also find Zakarum's comments in Post 225 troublesome because even though Boggzie is his prime suspect due to his behavior on Day One, he never votes for him nor points a FOS at him. Rather he points a FOS at mcpaltp, hasdgfs, and myself instead without providing much explanation.
In Post 219, he explained he did this because he figured he would "through[sic] out what I feel and think". Yet offers little with regard to his number one suspect. That, I find suspect.
But now it looks like
my
number one suspect will be replaced. Even still, I am going to:
Vote: Zakarum
While it may not prod Zakarum, I hope that it will put some heat on his replacement to engage in discussion quickly and substantively so that I can determine if I should focus my attention to other suspects.
. Good to see you back 