In post 1585, Aj The Epic wrote:No, I only mentioned a few posts but referenced a couple more (CKD case and the claim, for example).
I want to see his thoughts right now. To be honest, out of 23 players I could vote for, I'm picking my brain for who fits where. Darthe comes up as one of the loose ends right now.
Attacking a neighbor isn't a day 1 move that town generally does, especially before ever talking to his partner. Then, he just goes ahead and role claims. No trying to solve this subtly, just the claim.
And let's face it, Darthe hasn't given his stance.
What I'm looking for is the ones who have been voting on major wagons, but simply sheeping. I really want to look at JS because I think his play is incredibly stupid, but I think that may be more of a VI. Even with Darthe, the motive for how you play each individual role as town doesn't seem to be there.
You're a neighbor, haven't talked with your partner yet, claim he defended scum, and then basically outed yourself.
How does town go about the same situation, even saying Bumi DID defend Sixx? Maybe build a case, probably ask Bumi specifically about specific posts. Present certain questions. A neighbor between someone you can verify as pro-town is a double vote, someone who will support you, and possibly someone who can help you develop reads. Yet he claims? Why? It's almost as if Darthe is trying to use his claim as leverage to get a lynch.
The issue I still see is why does Darthe end up pushing so hard if he IS scum? I could see the WIFOM of "Led the town wagon, no reason to do so" ideology, but it is something rare to see in mafia, especially to get a simple lynch. Unless one of the current wagons was a scum partner. I believe this last part is untrue, because we do know Darthe voted for Zstife. The reasoning was shaky, so it could be a distancing tactic. His first post has Zstife as scummy. In the end, I need answers on this slot. To me, he's the most suspicious because I currently am going under the assumption NJ is VI.
To the bolded things in this post: Is this even a real discussion or are you that dumb? This entire post is written from the perspective of someone attempting, and failing, at assuming that I am mafia before they write it. Allow me to expound using a mixture of logic and psychology as the basis. In sentence three the statement is made "I'm picking my brains for who fits where" The implication is that judgement is being made and, by proxy that the poster sees connections in our character, notably not in factuality. The underlined statement after: The opening sentence states that *a townie* that is a neighbor doesn't attack their other neighbor day one. It then goes to say that the role claim was not subtle, implying both that the poster is being subtle (I refer you to the link of myself and their note of anti-town actions, subconsciously approached in the statement) and it states that I have not spoken to my neighbor. I find it interesting that AJ seems to *know* this information. Because it is very specific. Roger, who I replaced, did speak to my neighbor. Of course, the entire idea of this post is to attempt to make me appear incriminating while sliding over the host of reasons that I revealed, including that with the town up 1 scum already it was optimal timing and fit with the evidence provided in Bumi's efforts.
The entire second paragraph here is an in depth reiteration of the poster's core point, the message that they are attempting to persuade the group of. Read clearly and you can note that I am indirectly mentioned as anti-town in word or action in every sentence save two. The underlined is a direct redoubling of the underlined statement in paragraph one.
The third paragraph warrants the most incredulity however. It shows that the poster has considered his opponents thoughts and attempted to counter them before they were brought to light by pointing out how incredibly logical those would sound! Because, as we all know, it is far better to assume that people intentionally made the wrong decision in a gambit to draw suspicion and thereby seemingly commit political suicide, only so they can play a thin ploy to gain some mild support when they are under no suspicion...? Right?
And so I am brought back to my opening line. To the bolded things in this post: is this even a real discussion or are you just that dumb? And yes, that is sarcasm.
My final mention here is the finer point of the play I made in revealing. It is a simple yet effective tactic affectionately known at my home site as beating the grass to startle the snakes. Action=reaction=???=profit.
Vote AJ the Epic
