Woa, finally I got my head pulled down at the laptop to read the last 3 pages and try to somewhat compile a picture in my head the game - Though I believe I need to do that a couple of times before my usual game activity appears - So much stuff keeps crawling up and disrupting one. Anyway lets see if I can get some of the stuff going I was considering while reading.
A lot of thoughts coming up.. bear with me
Oh and just to confirm that I've have seen that Rod was proven :P
Personally (and for obvious reasons) I really don't like the way Baz and TB have dealt with it. But I'm kind of at the limit of what I can get out of it now, since it's starting to concern me directly. I'll be re-reading though.
Well that is part of my troubles for getting into this again. It really depends on the point of view I take when reading this. My preferred point of view is that you NFY found a correct target and then his two buddies tried to save him (him being stoic)... The reason of that is due to me agreeing with NFY before the others got involved, with stoics post giving me a scummy vibe and with some arguments that reminded me of a was it game 10? But now comes the reason why I can't believe that point of view, as there is several things speaking against it. The likeliness of 3 mafias being part of the 7 active and all of them gunning for NFY.. minimal at best. The case from game 10 I was considering was between me and what was his name..? Anyway, in that one I had a good argument and the argument against it was exactly lopsided to be pointing only at the flaw I made in the argument. Now this reminds me of this case, where stoic primarily agrees with TB and Baz and then mentions his Damuna argument.. But in the game 10 I am thinking about, I was thirdparty and the guy I was convinced was scum, was actually town cop. So wtf? Makes it hard to judge for this case. On the other view I also see it making sense if I look as stoic being the new guy and the others being TB and Baz taking that stance. Hence I don't see anyone of them giving enough of a case to lynch the other. I could go with lynching stoic due to how scummy his post felt to me, but with the recent posts by Baz and TB I don't see that as surely as I did before my absence, but the similar applies to NFY - whom I don't see lynched either. Hence I will take a third view and look at TwilightBard whom I find to have made a little switch which bother me.
Initially in this Stoic/NFY case he is gunning for stoic, then when NFY asks of his thoughts in regards of NFY's other points his reply turns into a defense for stoic and he ends by saying the very argument Baz had pointed out against NFY. The same argument... and then when NFY responded to him, he didn't respond to her. (Just to clarify, I am aware that TB didn't leave stoic out of the picture, but I want to hear more as to TB's reason). And as someone also mentioned that we should use our votes more: vote TwilightBard
until I see more in regards of his reply to NFY's reply.
And yes, I am still mostly for stoic being the scum of the two. Hope someone makes sense of this thought pattern enough to get what I mean :P