Poppy [claimed that they] didn't read their PM, too??

Also, I asked you some things in #324. Do you mind answering?


Maybe I'm just stupid but I still don't get it. Let's make it easier. Ultimately (after you've taken into consideration all aspects, meta and whatever) do you find SPF scummy or not?

Eh, no. We didn't lynch *someone* D1, and he became the Topic of the Day on D3 when we were practically at MYLO. Nothing else was discussed. He got brigged. Wel lost. Could have been avoided if *someone* was lynched D1.

I see. But this isn't about lynching someone versus lynching no one, is it? It's about lynching Carradice versus someone else.

Thanks for the bump. That *someone* was ZFR. He played very badly D1. Was at L-1 but wasn't lynched. Then he continued to be a distraction for the whole game, despite bler's request not to.

#210-#246.

#275 was when Carradice confirmed he already read the PM. But if I understood it right he had already read it earlier, right? so at the time that discussion was taking place he had already read it.

You said voting Carradice is stupid and I am voting him so... :-)

Well, the difference is that's what I see it as (lying) and I presonally have not seen anything to change that view so it feels wrong to me how you switched from you previous opinion to "vote for Carradice is vote for dumbness" fairly quickly.



Or it can just be forgotten and people wouln't bring it up if they deem it was innocent. I don't really see the situation when suddenly someone brings it up D4 and lynches him based on it. At least I don't see it at the level that would warrant lynch to get rid of distraction.
If you expect it to be mislynch at the end-game, it would be the same mislynch D1, not moving us closer to win and using up lynch opportunity.

Your posts don't show me much other reasoning than distraction removal. Is it the argument over no-lynch x bad lynch?


Ok, you've lost me now. I thought you were saying you find him scummy but he acted the same way previously as town so it is possibly not scummy but now you say you would vote for him because of it if he wasn't sick?

The way I understood it is that they read it after they were finished writing for the night. So I found the last post for the previous night (the was some 10-15 hours difference between posts which I used as a marker) and considered that as the border between not read vs read. Obviously all of this is based on what Carradice said and taking that as the truth. In my opinion this whole thing boils down to whether or not you or anyone else believes the PM stuff is true. If you do believe it's true then you can't hold anything they did or said prior against them as stupid as that may be. If you believe the whole thing was a sham - vote way, by all means. I'm ready and open to be persuaded that was the case but it just doesn't make any sense for scum to lie in that way.


Got it. Sorry about that :)

I didn't want to vote them because of it but to make things right as this whole thing actively annoyed me.


I'm getting tired of this gender-neutral pronouns. @Carradice, I haven't played with you before so I don't know how I'm supposed to refer to you. Male or female?

I don`t know what he is on, but it’s good.

OK, if he hadn't read his PM at that time, then of course it's all NAI. That's why I asked my question which was answered in 275 and I took to mean that the PM was read a bit later after the game started (and read by the time we had the discussion). But reading #275 agai, it's not clear so you could be right.

Alright, for now unvote Carradice

Unless something major changes I'm just going to forget the "didn't read PM" thing.

And let me make things clearer - Carradice can still be scum, no question about it. My main point is that if PMgate™ is real then any supposed evidence prior 275/280 isn't proof of anything. So technically this still can be a good lynch, it's just that there isn't good justification to trigger it.

Actually, not on D1, not a game-day, but my first real day playing, while catching up reading all that.


@POOKA

I wrote the post on the admin thread as I saw the forum eating two of my posts. I did so inmediately I did not want to post a third time, lest it was eaten again. Maybe I should have post about it in the game thread itself, somehow I thought that the forum admin thread was enough.

Yes because it's anti-town behaviour regardless of alighment. Being unwell is a genuine real life excuse

SPF has given a really good RL reason. He has even made an effort to participate yesterday. Rule #4 is intended to be a real guideline to reflect upon.

So, after all that ado about people not voting, it turns out that it is ZFR who is not voting. Talk about irony. He is the only one in that group of three that does not have an excuse. Yogs has just arrived, and SPF has called in sick and has been struggling to participate. Yet ZFR has been there since the beginning, and making much noise about the dangers of scum not doing anything, etc. What made no sense, as smart scum should always spread out in different directions. If ZFR was asking for town to focus on people not voting, all scum had to do is voting, of course! Especially since there is day chat and they can coordinate. Then he neglects voting himself. Do not forget that he has even called for a lazy vote instead of focusing on hunting scum. This is inconsistency itself.

The best that can be thought of this is that ZFR is manipulating his meta so that he is no longer seen as “rational” or “making sense” or being a good scum hunter, so that he avoids getting the first NK again. Or maybe this is the real ZFR. Anyway, the chain of posts that he is writing in this game makes no sense at all.

He was literally voting 55 minutes ago (for you nonetheless). Maybe allow him some time to reconsider after he decided his choice maybe wasn't that great? This post doesn't look good.