that generalization is what I'm refering to. my phrasing of the accusation may have been subpar, the content remains the same. you are misrepresenting the cases of some who isn't here to handle them anymore (doll) by saying the case on TBF and the case on 4mask are "the same". They are not. you know they are not. and respond to the content of my accusation of you please, not just sweep it under the rug over a minor phrasing difference.
I am not misrepresenting the cases, because I didn't mention any of the cases specifically. I meant the cases where broadly the same, in that they were based around a player not contributing because they were either inactive - Johiah and Gentlefish - or active but not producing content - 4mask, TBF, and I think Hapah falls under this one too.
It's funny you bring up doll though, considering they brought up the cases being similar in the first instance:
You are voting 4maskwolf "as per doll", but by the same standards on which I am pursuing 4maskwolf I am also casting shade on Gentlefish and Hapah (and johiah) and yourself.
Which is what I meant regarding the "essentially the same" you seem so caught upon.
So where exactly am I misrepresenting? You have yet to bring that to our attention here. It is a verb, an action word, which means I must've left some evidence somewhere.
Please, for the third time, point to specific evidence of me misrepresenting any of the cases from D1, doll's or otherwise.
Hector13: your vote before I made my case was on 4mask. you unvoted in reaction to my case.
No, I unvoted because there was more time for things, though my interest in the game had waned as a result of all the replace requests, and it was slow to return. Your case had little to do with my unvote, considering I didn't particularly want to vote 4mask in the first place.
doll's play didn't sit right with me, and they are quite difficult to read. 4mask's flip would have allowed me to hopefully get a more solid read on them, which became moot after doll (and 4mask) decided to replace out.
... then when you had the power to control the tiebreak you voted johiah. Johiah was less involved in anything/everything than 4mask, and a lot of the value of the lynch is in seeing how people stand, publically, and how the lynch reflected upon them. We learned far less from the johiah lynch you decided upon than we would have from a 4mask one. So why did you change your mind in those final hours from 4mask to johiah, with no input from either of them in the interum to cause the change?
In the short-term we learned less of things with johiah's lynch, yes. In the longer-term, we got rid of a player who would draw a lot of suspicion had they remained in the game (if Johiah didn't make the replacement request) which would only benefit scum, and we had players replacing the other requesters but not Johiah. I didn't particulary want to drag around the dead weight, in either case.
additionally you have claimed twice now that all 4 cases made yesterday were essentially identical. I saw all four as substantially different and unique from one another. TBF was being voted for his meta, as a push to improve, which you showed you understood here:...I will say to OSG (oh hey you're back yourself man 
) that he's voting TBF for what is essentially TBF's meta. He's... not the best player. I'm uncertain if this is intentional, because he does it as town and scum, and is consequently tough to read, but it is fair to say that his play benefits the scum a lot more than it does the town.
In terms of who to lynch, like I said before, it seems the 4 major cases we've had this day have been more or less the same, with a few personal views sprinkled in over why any particular case is more notable than any other.
I think there has been a lot of good stuff generated this day, the main issue being that in order for it all to begin making sense, someone has to flip. The main problem with that is that we've just had a third of the town replace in at the deadline so... that's not all that helpful for all that would happen after the flip to make sense.
...
the accusation of johiah was passive-lurking and new player failing to interact effectively, the accusation of 4mask was active-lurking in a veteran player who knows better, and Hapah's case is based on a hypocritical position he took against doll and him voting for a player he himself considers towny.
The details of the various cases were different, yes, but the crux of them I felt were essentially the same. Your case against Hapah came after I said the cases were similar, and I wasn't paying attention to it because you were tunneling so hard there, and my aforementioned interest levels were quite low around that point.
Perhaps you could boil down your case against Hapah with relevant quotes attached? Your initial case is mixed in with your assessment of 4mask's play, and you did a dump of all Hapah's posts from the game that really isn't all that helpful, even with highlighted commentary.
