(Addressed to DarknessB)
I can see where Minized is coming from when he calls this opportunistic - Darkness is using the
the scum-kill to complement his scumread, as if he's oblivious to the fact the
scums are the ones who control the scum-kill, and it's in their direct interests to use the kill to
worsen our scumreads.
I'm shocked that you agree with the player pushing back against the person scumreading you -- really, no kidding! Scum are just as motivated to get rid of those who suspect them, especially when that player wasn't particularly active / vocal and had promised to be more so today.
^If you're not going to put
at least as much thought into the night-kill as the scums, you have no chance of correctly reading the scumkill
. Killing one town in a tvt to make the other look town look bad is not a pie-in-the-sky conspiracy theory.
Yes, it's possible they did that. Doesn't explain the rest of your d1 behavior though -- excessive policy lynch analysis, IIOA in lieu of opinions at EOD, suddenly changing your vote to lynch NU at EOD and saying that I convinced you when there was no progression to suggest that.
Darkness also has to see how susp-looking it is to use the PL-strat-thing as an excuse now, when he was the one who originally gave a compelling argument for why it was NAI from me.
Reads evolve and you take additional happenings in the game into account, such as your YOLO lynch of your supposed Townread, NU. When you get more data (i.e. NU's flip), you should go back and review what's happened in the game from that vantage point.
Guess you need an easy lynch lol.
Ok?
Rather than bother to consider what the fuck went on yesterday and how he ended up spearheading a catastrophic mislynch that ate into half our discussion time, he's propelled right into shallow night-kill analysis, resurrected outdated arguments and launched a vote on the one player who spent posts and posts trying to placate the NU VS. BC + Titus, because it's "suspicious he came to agree that lynching NU was better for the town
so suddenly".
We're early in Day 2. I've given a theory as to what I think is going on -- you're free to posit your own. You literally have one vote on you and you're jumping into the OMFG I'M GETTING LYNCHED level defense. If anything, you're the one who is writing a giant tome to discredit all of my play right now instead of defending your own. That's a classic scumplay -- not focused on your own play, but trying to discredit your accuser. You're also giving yourself a lot of credit as the "one player" who didn't agree with the lynch. How about SP or Mesk for that matter?
Sorry I did not give enough posts showing my gradual persuasion by your arguments. I thought we'd all see it was obvious that, though I had tried my damned hardest to dismantle the NU train, I'd eventually accept that letting it run into d2 would corrupt and distract us for another day, and that I had come to agree with the arguments Mini, Matt and DB had given in favor of finishing the lynch off. I'm not a sheep - I could have easily picked an easier train than Mattzed - NU for example - so to suggest I lazily leaned on you is ridiculous.
Yeah, you were too busy posting summaries for the two AFK players -- that's exactly my point. You didn't share your thoughts, perhaps because you were afraid of slipping or saying something that you didn't intend. It's very easy and safe to post summaries that I doubt Banana and Ginger are even going to read. Funny how you didn't point out this view (that NU needed to be lynched) until 5 minutes before EOD. Before that, you were almost hoping that some lurker like Eggy would come and hammer NU -- you directly said that yourself.
"Just because I heard your explanations, doesn't mean I agree with them."
Right, that's called having an opinion, and that's why you give counter arguments to my explanations. That's called backing up your opinion. You don't just say "yeah I saw your counter explanations, but keeping these outdated arguments is convenient for me right now", you have to give new arguments that say something like:
"well yeah you gave a completely reasonable explanation for why your day summary came when it did, but I think everything you say at EOD should be an opinion, even if it's physically impossible to muster enough votes to get your scumread (Mattzed) lynched, because even if you've posted more opinions in the last 24 hours than nearly anyone else, every fact you give counts as at least -3 opinions".
Basically you're suggesting that instead of trying to muster another lynch, you should just sheep the leading vote on your Townread, no less. Why is that exactly? You literally burned the entire EOD posting summaries as well when the option of another lynch could have been raised. As much as I didn't like SP's EOD, at least he owned his view of no-lynch because he Townread NU. You flip-flopped without explanation.
I asked DB if he was up-to-date to make sure he wasn't simply uninformed. I wonder if the dentist loaded his brain with drugs.
Maybe you should focus on justifying your scummy play instead of trying to discredit me and sheeping onto MiniZed's opportunistic meme. You're the one who is saying we need to think about what happened last night. Go ahead and explain it -- I gave my explanation. Your turn.