You missed out UK. That's four. Furthermore, your post.
Except UK wasn't online at the time. Also, four *other* people (as in, you and four others). Fail, etc.
Logically, this gives some kind of pretext for a wrathie vote, doesn't it? You never did say that you were explcitly against a wrathie vote then after all, though you highlighted him blue, you gave me enough reason to believe that you were fine with one.
Basically.
I don't think wrathie is scum, I don't think I have all game, and if memory serves I haven't voted or even pushed him. However, I can entirely understand a policy lynch on him just from the sheer mania caused by his existence today (i.e. the fact that a majority of the players wanted to lynch him out the gate).
That was not my point, however you misrepresent it. My point is that there is a lack of reasoning, rendering those points totally null and void and not worth considering or even stating on any grounds. Helium is not content.
Oh, I wouldn't say that. For one, the two examples you give are cherry-picked from the weaker points in the set. For another, I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who's getting bad vibes from your posts. And for a third bit, you seem pretty interested in speaking in absolutes today - these things CANNOT be considered, this means NOTHING, etc., which strikes me as odd.
Which is my point? I don't see yours; ceteris peribus is when you consider that point only without considering anything else.
I didn't take Latin in high school.
Also, you're wrong. Saying that pesco is not worth considering because Rou (who you yourself suggested was not anti-Town) did a similar scummy thing is a blatant fallacy.
I disagree. Tell me how Rou is different in 'pointless setup speculation'; 'slightly plausible' doesn't cut it because it so stupidly ambiguous and rather throwaway. The idea of gut feelings with less than good reasoning being automatically considered as scummy is present here, and the situations are actually similar.
Mmm... no.
Rou's case - Alice claimed Doc, got quasi-counterclaimed, got investigated Innocent by a Cop that somehow survived the Night even though he wasn't targeted - all of these things are actually present in the thread, and they seem to have fallen together rather conveniently to the point where it could appear to be staged. In fact,
your earlier push on Alice today was a CONTINUATION of this theory!Pesco's case - Edible/I am tunneling on poor Alice/Pesco! Clearly they have an ulterior motive - they have to secure an Alice/Pesco lynch and don't care about the rest of the Town! HELP ME MOKOOOOOOOOOOOOOOU!
Notice the
abject lack of supporting evidence while attempting to discredit (in my case) Pesco's attacker.
Don't understand why you're asking these questions. You said it yourself; pesco was useless except for the case of wrathie, and the lynchee-lyncher argument, which I find inadequate and shouldn't even be considered. People were pushing donut because he was whining and useless as well, not to mention pushing a case on Roukanken, which actually adds to his case more so than pesco's; similar reasons with one side clearly stronger (in my view) than the other.
I never did understand why donut was scummy for pushing a case on Rou screaming No Wai That's Impossible. So that takes care of the third question - they
weren't exactly the same reasons, and in fact I would place Pesco higher in suspicion because I believe donut's response to Rou was rather understandable.
Plus you're ignoring that Pesco put out quite a bit more fluff than donut.
The first two points you have put are completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand; all that matters is that there were people pushing pesco in day one for, and that there was donut and S.P present who were more deserving of a vote that he was.
No, you're dodging the question. You said "people" were pushing "donut and others", and the last time I checked you were referring to
Day 2 when you made that statement.
whut. If Nietz wants to self-hammer, he wants to self-hammer, and I can do nothing to affect that decision.
This is the point where I can't take you seriously.
Of course you did something to affect that decision; you gave him the opportunity to do so. In fact, you did the same thing for Pesco the day before.
-----
First of all, I want you to answer this question posed by Alice; e.g why did you peg wrathie as town?
For one, the same reason I've got him down as likely Town now - he's been too ridiculous, and I think the flailing is genuine. In addition, if you look at the vote record, more often than not he's NOT following the crowd with his votes. I would expect someone who's never been Mafia to at least add to the popular wagons, instead of creating a spectacle of himself off in a corner.
This post is of questionable merit as pointed out by Alice, ignoring 161 almost completely and overlooking people like Kanako or Sodium Peroxide or donut. Scum-like clairvoyance is present; at the very least, a tinge of pesco-meta usage. Almost like a predetermined bus,
Some clairvoyance. I had Nietz as Town and donut as Not Sure Yet. Otherwise, you're going to blame me for CORRECTLY reading S.Peroxide and Kanako (to the point of protesting the popular Kanako lynch)?
Lastly, very minimal questioning of pesco and no clear progression of thought processes on this page before declaration of him being obvscum; e.g jumping to the lyncher thingy on post 201 before going on with the Alice tangent; as if you were waiting for a mistake to happen before knowing what to jump on. It's something worth pointing out, I guess; nothing really seems to add up in the span of post 157 to 201.
Are you getting paid to write this case? Pesco's attempt to push Alice was obviously scummy, and I called him on it. Adding this to my previous suspicion based on him Active Lurking, this equated to a preferred lynch. Besides, at the time my concern with Pesco was that he wasn't producing anything; there were no follow-up questions to ask.
He also cites reasons like ' hey, only one serious post', without any evaluation of the content present in that post. For these reasons, as well as very fluid opinions on UK (e.g UK being confirmed town by rather superficial reasons to "oh gosh I read Edible's and Zak's posts and she's scum), I think I have enough reasons for a vote.
Um... what?
After rereading UK, I think between Zakeri and Edible's posts there's decent enough of a case for me to...
##Unvote: Affinity
##Vote: UncertainKitten (L-2)
...considering the deadline.
Key words bolded. I didn't like the Zakeri case, and the UK case was better. Notice the lack of conviction that you can see in, say, posts like this.
But hey, you can have your OMGUS. You've spread vague suspicion around to everyone else today; 'may as well try this approach and hope it works.
I'd much rather see Alice or wrathie comment now. I don't have to convince you of anything, after all... and you're certainly not convincing me.