Simoyd
342
Can you elaborate on that incentive? I don't understand why scum would be motivated to do that.
Myself/106
Scum aren't in a hurry to contribute here if accused as each new post they aren't involved in offers opportunities. So, what about town? It would be in a townie's interest to make a meaningful post ASAP if they were the one being accused.
Scum can get an improved position by waiting. Townies have nothing to gain by playing a game.
I don't see how IV could possibly be manipulating the game by post 46. Trying to pick someone on vacation as an easy target?
He wasn't tagged as V/LA, and when he replied talking about supposed LA and mafia burnout he didn't say anything that changed my mind about post 46, either.
376
Also in 226 and 269 you killed the votes on pants, but these feel really forced and convoluted as well. You could have conveyed the idea with much fewer words. You basically just repeated yourself over and over...
This answer doesn't make as much sense w/o a reply I have saved for IV, but my point was that I was trying to establish Pants/Myself and Pants/Accountant as unviable or weak partners, so having all three of us on his scumlist was suspicious to me.
So, to answer. It reads that way because I wrote it that way. I started off questioning IV about why Pants was on his list at all, then offered him the same question I asked Accountant. Of course, I didn't want an answer any more, because asking two different people and already admitting to being disappointed with the first answer already tells how I feel about it. I started with the conclusion and why I was disappointed in Accountant's answer when I felt like the answer should have been especially clear for him. In the second-last paragraph I described a Pants lynch as a low information one, and finished the post by telling IV to argue his case with me if he wanted to vote me. The implication was that since I thought Pants was on his list for no reason, I felt he didn't have the heart to truly pursue me, even though he should have been pursuing anyone besides Pants for reasons already stated, because failing to do so would have been in my opinion the same as riding out the deadline.
Additionally in 269 you say "I questioned why you were voting me at all if you were going to defend rather than attack all game". I've read it a dozen times, what does that mean?
The only attacks IV was doing was with the meta argument, which I was dismissing as complaining. There wasn't anything proactive in his case.
In 130 you parroted part of my wall regarding Accountant defending IV, without adding anything. And in 156 you claim this to be your reason ("my own misgivings"), but it was already said...
I had plenty of misgivings about Accountant, but dropping pressure on IV for Accountant was going to be pointless.
Later In 260 you said you'd let accountant slide, but that's not what happened in 130 and 156. You did pressure him. This back and forth bugs me. What is your read on accountant now?
Also in 156 you mention that noone pressuring accountant, then say "Reeks of scum". Are you saying accountant reeks of scum? Or the situation reeks of scum?
#130 I wanted a reaction from him-anything to draw him to IV-who I was focusing on would have been nice. #156 is actually a defense of Accountant. At this point he is L-1 or L-2-I forget, but he got to L-1 with some of the primary drivers on the wagon not saying anything at all, so it would be the latter.
My reads are honestly awful right now. I don't think Accountant/IV / Accountant/Snoe / IV/Snoe are partners. In fact, I don't think IV is leaning much to scum right now. So, I have my own dilemma of choosing between Accountant/Snoe, and I think I'll have a better idea of it tomorrow.
Through 255 and 259 you claim to be able to call his alignment 100%! I would love to hear the explanation behind that! How was Accountant's answer not definitive?
I later explained this in post 266.
Myself/266
I'll flat out say right now: Pants is not the best choice. That's why I was disappointed with Accountant's answer: he could have said RC was just as likely, or that they were the scumteam, that one was more likely than the other sure, but what I asked was if Pants was the best lynch candidate. This means yes or no, not "yes if not him then other person". I don't know if that's 50/50 or 80/20 or in favor or who.
Simply, Pants is not the best lynch because it doesn't give us clues as to who his partner is. For Accountant moreso-that's why I said it was important and asked him, rather than anyone else. In my opinion, if Pants flips scum Accountant is town. I think this is a safe assumption. For the rest of us, we won't have much clue as to who their partner is based on their posts, but we will know two things-we are town, and Accountant is very likely town as well. Accountant does not get this luxury-if town, they would only know one person is town and has less scumhunting to work with tomorrow. Therefore, there is no scumhunting Accountant can do tomorrow that he cannot do today..
tl;dr I didn't feel like his post was definitive, and since he didn't seem sure enough to express a preference between Pants/Snoe and RC, I felt like he gave me a bad answer when he had an easy good answer he could have given me instead.
