Now for the long, long reply to Starver.
Ok, I didn't think it worth comment, but...
When have I ever told anyone not to say anything? I may counsel against revealing certain pieces of information, but that doesn't mean I want you to be quiet. There's more than one way to skin a cat find scum in mafia, none of which are useful if you don't actually interact with others.
I never heard anything other than a shutting down of conversation.
And, fully understanding that I think that, you vote my way...
Another paraphrasing of aggressive memes: prove it, bro. I've mentioned before I sometimes find it difficult to penetrate what you're trying to say.
Specifically:
Pondering, now my power is recharged... FOS on Hector, but far too little information to tell. (Precisely why the FOS, shutting down speculation.) I hate Day 1s.
Now this is going to come across as really nit-picky, but it's what caused me to think you weren't providing a reason for your FoS. You used a comma and didn't say to whom you were referring (you or me) so I assumed you were saying "I'm not going to provide a reason for my FoS" as opposed to what you meant, which was "the reason I'm FoS'ing hector is because I feel he's shutting down speculation." Had you used a colon instead, I probably wouldn't have misinterpreted it. This was also partly as a result of you dropping the FoS with 5 minutes left in the day, which I'll go into in the next bit.
Oh, and for a FoS. Can't actually remember the last time I officially FoSsed, so maybe it was something tricky and strategic, but even if I deliberately sniped it in at the end of the day, it altered nothing. It could definitely wait to be discussed. Although as I gave my reason, I was hoping you'd have a decent counter.
If it could wait to be discussed, why did you drop it with 5 minutes to day end? This was your only contribution for the day, and you gave no time for discussion, and it also happened to be on the only person voting for you. You know I'm not going to keep discussing things post-deadline, as I have probably said at least once every round "day's over, stop talking" or some variation thereof.
Thus, I panicked a bit because I felt it was very likely to influence night actions, and I had no time to get into a discussion about what you were saying - which I consequently misinterpreted - and the fact that I felt it was a massive OMGUS.
Like reply to:
Logic is seemingly impeccable, but what then do we do?
...like you could be said to have conveniently ignored.
I addressed this a bit with TBF: I'm not the only player in the game. You were silent D1, with the exception of your 5-minutes-to-deadline-FoS. Why didn't you bring up something to say? Why are you not throwing shade TBF or Moonlit's way?
FoU came up with something, but nobody did anything about it.
Moonlit posted the same picture he had earlier,
TBF agreed with him -
same as he did earlier - and then
FoU complained, so
I asked him to answer his own question so we knew what he was trying to get at.
He offered nothing, and you were entirely silent during proceedings. After advising folk not to do a bone-headed move like claim D1, I was the only one who even
tried to get someone to offer something new.
I don't see what the point of it was, other than to say "I'll be targeting you during the night, bro."
I'd have to go into the territory of bluff, double-bluff, etc, to so label myself as the author of your nightly demise. If anything, I've probably protected you, by highlighting (assuming the bad guy is neither of us) a handy scapegoat for the real enemy. Which I'll admit is something I overlooked until the cold dark of night.
Well you accepted this argument was WIFOM, but that doesn't change the fact that I'm not convinced your intentions were benevolent. I told you what I felt you were doing with your FoS, which is part of why I reacted the way I did and continued voting for you at the start of the day.
Could speculate further that he wants the cautious one out of the way so the rest of you claim willy-nilly so he knows who to target, but as I say, speculation.
Right now, your idea could be as valid as mine, save that I know what I intended and what I've been misread about, and I know that nobody else knows this.
Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us, then? Might be more helpful than "I know you're wrong and nobody else knows why, so nyeh."
De-spoilered, there being no use for it:
It has occurred to me that the Evil role might have an action that is controlled by another player, perhaps so we can't just figure out who they are when we do get 'round to claiming.
Whether the evil is (unknowingly?) controlled, or not, only one person does not seem to have an inkling of this more general scenario. Whether this leads credence to any particular theory, or not, I can not yet divine.
It was spoilered so folk would know from reading the tag that I was speculating, rather than building on anything specifically that I know about.
Here is me discussing the mechanics of the round.
First one vaguely counts, although is a bit obvious. Second is a shoot-down (unless you intended to make me think it was more likely). Third is after I called you out, perhaps to divert from your own pre-emptive OMGUS.
(By the way, OOC: Hello from Penzance. Not seen any pirates yet.)
How does the first one only vaguely count? I was speculating about the evil role, then was trying to get Moonlit to explain what he was saying, through implication than explicit questions.
He then proceeded to confuse me more with his response, immediately after the linked post, and I linked the post after that in my second link, saying he wasn't actually clearing things up, followed by him saying he was guessing. Now, right at the start of the game is not necessarily the best time for guessing, so I agreed with FoU that we'd actually better start scumhunting. No amount of speculation will help us find the scum if we don't actually interact with the other players.
I did suggest to TBF not to claim, because I thought that would be a stupid thing to do D1.
The third link was me continuing my vote from the previous day, so how is it an OMGUS? I voted you on D1 because you had said nothing, and then you dropped an FoS on me right at day end, which we've gone into already.
I'm presently stuck between continuing voting for
Starver or going for
TBF. He piggy-backed on Starver's argument, and when I pointed that out he backed off. Not sure how to interpret that.
I have noticed that they have both ignored my questions on why I'm such a special snowflake, too.
Not pleased that
Moonlit and
FoU are slipping way under the radar though. Perhaps they'd like to interject with their thoughts?
makes you look super suspicious man.
