INCORRECT! Your first paragraph is laughable since by all means anyone attacked for any reason is an "easy mislynch". Again, you have not adequately demonstrated how this at all differs from my situation, quite a more obvious case of being an "easy mislynch", since, as you know, I'm at L-3 for really shitty reasons. If Steven is so ideal, why has my vote been the only one on him all game it seems?
Your reasoning was worse because it wasn't all on the table, as well as the fact it sounds like you're making it up as I press you, whereas John showed his work within the first couple posts. Or maybe I just like John better :3c. Either way, fact remains that it took quite a few posts of back and forth between us to get to the crux of your "case". Why did it take so long for you to get to explaining the situation clearly? That's what bugs me about the way you've attacked. That and your position on the wagon.
And your last paragraph is laughable because it is BLATENTLY FALSE :O! You've decided suddenly that your word is LAW, and it is not. Your "interpretation" of my actions is the ONLY version of events that allows for your conclusion. I haven't DONE anything except pushed a case on someone who was scummier than the others for awhile. Your argument is INHERENTLY subjective, since it requires both me to be scum and Steven to be town, two things no one except scum would know. It's quite easy to see my early actions as trying to get the game moving and trying to find scum, cause guess what? That's what they WERE. Just as it's easy to see Steven's action as rolefishing and railroading. Or, as you interpret, overcautious noobiness. But, you know what's great about that? You even admit yourself the fact Steven was using the mason to refrain from a vote is scummy!
So, from my perspective, I see no difference. What we have here is blatant hypocrisy. Allow me to chain the events!
Shoe attacks Steven Stone for rolefishing and railroading. She quite reasonably leaves the door open for counterargument. It's early D1, it's not likely anything will stick, but pressure will lead to information.
Others attack Shoe because supposedly she's picking on a newbie, which is unfounded given the very format of this game. Gamzee jumps in uncertainly testing the waters. When the wagon appears to be taking off, he jumps on.
Gamzee provides minimal reasoning, mostly piggy backing off of the supposed "easy mislynch" logic, as well as trying to add fluff to the situation. Overstating the fluff, for that matter. He backs off this tangent when it appears to not stick. I wonder why.
After several posts of back and forth between Shoe and Gamzee, we finally get to the crux of his argument, being that Shoe is supposedly going for an easy mislynch. Gamzee has nothing to support this claim, except the idea that Steven Stone is "an ideal scum target". He has provided no evidence to support this claim, and in fact the voting records HEAVILY imply otherwise.
Gamzee further claims that Shoe "actually did what she was accused of", despite the fact that what's she's accused of is quite speculative and subjective,
JUST AS THE CASE ON STEVEN STONE!Gamzee then claims that the situations are different, demonstrating a strong case of cognitive dissonance and ignorance of the facts at the least, and scummy hypocrisy, wherein he accuses Shoe of the very thing HE HIMSELF is guilty of!
DO YOU DISPUTE ANYTHING IN THIS CHAIN OF EVENTS, GAMZEE MAKARA!!!!
* Shoe glows with an unearthly light, appearing to prepare to cast a spell at Gamzee, firmly aware of her upper hand.
I await your response, but I also would like to interrogate Evangeline and Sandor as well, as the other two scum suspects. As I said, there's still a possibility you are unaware of your hypocrisy and were somehow quite mislead on the voting facts.
(I think I've been playing too much Umineko T_T;)