In post 329, droog wrote: In post 328, Yonom wrote:Eh, what an uncomfortable position you are putting me in.
This could be a pretty good attempt at scaring me off Smart's wagon (by making the result I am hoping for be unfavorable to me). Although maybe I'm reading too much into this, there wasn't much about EE that caught my eye as scummy.
for some reason this comes off
as an attempt to reframe the thought against you
solely so you can push it
like can you expand on why you voted for ss
why is your first reaction to make the other guy look guilty
I'm just trying to defend my position yo
It's the whole thing that ss keeps doing that seems very odd. He first makes one statement, sounding very convinced and serious. Like here:
In post 70, Something_Smart wrote:VOTE: Rhazh
Attacking people without voting to support it, making unprompted references to what the scum want or do, inconsistencies in play. Overall feels like he is trying to fit in and play like everyone else is.
Then he is called out by SirC to be scummy.
In post 72, SirCakez wrote:PC, Cow and Titus can go in the town pile.
SS and Rhazh can go in the scum pile.
Cerberus can be in the null pile alone.
I don't think anyone talked about Rhazh after this, and after a while after he saw that the Rhazh subject didn't catch a lot of attention (thats how I see it at least), he switched to voting for SirCakez.
I really started thinking it's odd after he switched his vote again to AI again, not mentioning why he moved away from SirCakez. That seemed like he was trying way too hard to successfully lynch someone. He was basically using every chance he got to switch his vote.
So I thought I would put my vote on him.
Now he has already been called out for this by others and he was able to provide some good explanations. But it's not that hard to come up with a good explanation for any situation. It seems weird that SS always has to go back and explain his actions. Every time he adds a few new details to his excuses, which makes me think he is making up a lot of these things. Example:
In post 196, Something_Smart wrote:I'm almost never confident day 1.
But that doesn't mean I don't have reasons.
And I haven't changed any of those reads. I voted Rhazh because he was mildly scummy. Then you were scummier so I voted you. Then AI was scummier so I voted him.
You're basically saying that once you have one scumread you should ignore everyone else and death tunnel that person. That's antitown.
Thats a lot of new details that he hadn't described before. Yes it makes sense that he thought someone else was scummier, but did he totally forget that he had voted for someone else before? Didn't it seem odd to him to switch his vote without any hint on the previous vote? I personally feel like I'd need to justify the change. It seems like he was too busy focusing on the new person to notice this though, lol. Which makes me question if he actually compared the person he was voting with the older suspects. Which makes me wonder how much thought he puts into his votes and if he knows the implications of a mislynch.
It seems like he is going through the players one by one and also I kinda feel like I'm next on his "list".