Rob13 wrote:1) You line up lynches.
2) I call you on lining up lynches.
And as I already said: you either have to be the most arrogant player EVER or flat-out just scum to think that I would
ever
change my stance just because you called me out on something.
The ACTUAL reason I backed off has been stated before: I was engaging Ricastle,
at Ricastle's request
, explaining myself and why I had that read...which, when Ricastle gave me reason to believe he was town, changed appropriately. This had absolutely no bearing on you calling me out, as it is something that would happen regardless. Because, duh, Ricastle made himself known as town; why wouldn't I change my read?
For Firebringer, my read was weakening, to the point where at deadline, when there was a wagon on Firebringer, I unvoted. This is because, contrary to your claim of me lining up mislynches, I was trying to get a good read on players, and I was doubting Firebringer as scum, strongly enough that I was willing to risk a no-lynch to avoid a Firebringer lynch. This goes far, far, FAR beyond the realm of logical scum play even
if
I were the type of player to ever be moved by someone calling me out. (I'm not. My reads are my own. Always have been, always will be.)
In #19, Ricastle was your scummiest read (although you say it's still not strong scum). In #85, you have him only one tier above Fire, fifth in a set of six tiers. You talk about having him in a specific order of lynches in #81. How is that not a scum read?
Because early-on, I was quite explicit that I
had
no scumreads. Ricastle was the least-town-looking player at the time, and later the second-least-town-looking-player, but not a true scumread.
Why would I note Ricastle as a developing scum read if I planned to kill him off that night?
The same exact reason you stated, "if I die": for the town credit such statements give.
Speaking of which, all your call for activity is awfully reminiscent of what I did in Blitz 7...as scum.
You're saying town players shouldn't be transparent like that?
Oh, town players should be transparent alright. But that's not what I was accusing you of. No, I said, rather specifically:
In response to this wrote:I noted the possible bussing because it was obviously going to be the next question ("BUT HOW COULD THEY BE PARTNERS WHEN JACKAL VOTED RANGER THEN IMMEDIATELY UNVOTED? WHO WOULD DO SUCH A THING?!?!?" ~ idiot townies everywhere).
...That this^ shows evidence of being preemptively defensive, something a town player is not. A town player will be transparent and respond, yes, but AFTER the question is asked, not before.
Clarity isn't the problem. Timing of it is.
davesaz wrote:I'd still much prefer Jackal, and had given intent. That's another reason to suspect Rob.
I had not thought of that, and that does make me feel better about you.
Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut...
VOTE: Jackal711.
While I'm pretty sure Rob is scum, realistically, I don't think I can get a lynch on him. We have the support on Jackal, though. Furthermore, Rob either has to eat his own words and not vote Jackal, or be forced back onto the Jackal wagon because it has more momentum than my own. Either case is a win in my mind.