Zak absorbed CF7's ability to make colorful kills. We were talking about the absurdity of scum not using the extra kill on N3. I'm pretty sure you were one of the people who said scum had some retarded plays in this game.
I'm not slamming you just for minutae because I'm not done slamming you just yet. In fact, have a quote wall I was going to post before this distraction:
Zak interactions are few. At least from Zak's side, which I'm focusing on.
Bad practice. You're missing out on a lot of implausible scumbuddy interactions by looking at less than 10% of them.
Zak with BT is the case on BT during Day 2. This comes after Zak's admission that he has a hard time pushing people as Scum due to not bothering to find out alignments much. The interesting part is that Zak in his next post drops the case, citing his reads on BT being somewhat reversed. "Reversed enough" not to be a priority. He has this case he is perfectly willing to drop without expounding much on the why.
I gave him the equivalent of a boot to the face with my response to the case and he proceeded to bugger off. What does this tell us except I felt like grilling my supposed scumbuddy and undermining their only serious case?
And that's it. His connections to Conq are lacklustre (explaining scum playstyle a bit and other pleasantries), and his connections to Shadoweh and Sky Paladin are non-existent.
Shadoweh's connections to Zakeri, Conq's connections to Zakeri, SpyPal's connections to Zakeri and my connections to Zakeri, on the other hand, sure do exist.
A case of Bard!Scum on roles alone is absurd. How am I supposed to defend from speculation about my role and the setup? A case of Bard!Scum based on play assumes I neglected to bus CF7 on Day 1 and instead stuck out my neck by not jumping on the easy case, and that on Day 2 I went hard against my neighbour and argued with him for the sake of saving a Townie when I could've as well latched on.
The other version: you try pushing substandard Serela in hopes that it'll take off in place of the CF7 wagon which will wither and roll over due to lack of content. Didn't happen, shoot, what'cha gonna do. You didn't stick out your neck that much - you just gave the occasional "CF7's probably still a newbie wagon, it's easy, the wagon's bad" line without addressing CF7 or the people on the wagon while clamping on Serela like nothing else was nearly as important. A case on Scum Bard sure does have this in it.
Yeah, you defended SkyPal, so? What's the groudbreaking news there?
And I stand by that I didn't think of CF7 as true blue Scum because the way he behaved was so stupidly retarded it just made no sense.
You know who else behaved stupidly retarded? Kingault. Didn't stop you from grilling him while passing CF7 over some simple ED1 post. Stupid and retarded does not a mafioso make, anyway.
So there's Scum!BT. The rolefish here is something that's catching my eye now on a reverse ISO. I think it's significant, because a lone Scum in the current situation'd need as much info as he can. That Sacchi died on the following Night is significant, because it shows Scum was genuinely worried about the motivator. I postulate that Scum!BT was worried about the motivator powers, and since he's claimed Ascetic would be ineligible to ever receive one.
You don't even bother seeing this thought process through to the end. Let's say I'm scum and I was concerned. What did I gain from knowing that it's temporary and not permanent? That only makes it less of an issue. The role query isn't actually significant to any of this and you're forcing meaning into it even though I plainly said it was out of curiosity. Townies get curious too. I'm sure it's in my meta somewhere.
The significance I want to point out here is that between 5 PM and 8:25 PM, there was a lot of time for BT to have written a case. He chooses not to, but hangs around for an hour posting short posts without building a case of anything. Three hours later, he votes Serela instead. If BT is Town-aligned, then why did he not spend a moment of that time trying to point Town in the direction of Scum through arguments and such? My answer: BT isn't Town, and he didn't particularly care a lot who gets lynched. But he couldn't justify staying on a claimed Tracker.
Oh man.
Dude did not play optimally.
The answer:
Not Town.
I "stayed on the claimed tracker" earlier than that too and I would have stayed on the claimed tracker it if I wasn't parcitipating in the discussion and thinking things through, but I guess that's not important. It's kind of a detriment to how you're trying to paint me, after all.
In fact I hardly see BT mentioning Serela anywhere in the thread and I'm on Day 2 already. His vote on Serela seemed very laissez-faire and #YOLOFUCKIT #shotsfired #forthewin, so my suspicions are heavily on BT right now.
This has never happened to BT ever, or any other player for that matter. Sheeping is the devil.
Another point of interest: The quicklynch of SkyPal. The content being so "scum-motivated" is an interesting point in the face of BT clearing SkyPal later. In this post he even backpedals a bit from "up for quicklynch, content scum-motivated" to "I was afraid he was Town"; how does this work, suggesting quicklynches on people you're considering may be Town?
You're actually taking things out of chronological order. I thought his play was scummy but I was still doubtful. Then came the walls which I was convinced were too misguided to be town at the time, painting people scummy and flinging accusations left and right, reminiscent of Scum SkyPal, expert bullshitter. Then came the VT claim and I came to the conclusion that the whiteknights in the thread - you're in there - might be right.
How about instead of gaming the setup you play the game and look over my case on BT, consider its points, and/or make a case on someone else instead?
2/3 done. Analysis time.
