Hmm... Hackerhuck your "let's lynch Cicero" Svengali post troubles me.
HackerHuck wrote:
Pwayne really seems overdefensive to me. He's really trying hard to prove that there's no connection between him and Cicero, but he's not going about it in a way that makes sense.
This feels like a non-statement designed to tie his hands. Can you show me where he is "over"defensive? Can you show me how his way doesn't make sense. I just see you tying hands. If he knows there's no connection why wouldnt he get frustrated? He seems thorough, willing to present evidence, and far less incendiary than I can be.
I find it telling that there is not word one about all the questions Skruffs refused to answer in your post that Pwayne listed, or about the list of votes he presented for TS to show that we voted together quite less often than was asserted and in each case it was for reasonable targets. This is particularly noteworthy since you had listed Skruffs as a top suspect.
It does seem strangely odd that Cicero is trying to buddy up to him
This is a shallow read. Im not trying to buddy up to Pwayne. The alliance is accidental and no doubt frustrating him quite a bit. What we have here is witchhunt logic and I personally don't know how to deal with it. Listen,
Pwayne and I are accused of being in cahoots.
Pwayne and I know we are not in cahoots.
Pwayne and I both set out in this new common cause which has been foist upon us of arguing against the fact that we are in cahoots.
This is shown as even more evidence that we are in cahoots.
Or that I am buddying up to him or vice versa. So the defence cant help but reinforce the proposition. See the problem?
------------------------
Next, Why do you have nothing to say about the constant misrepresentations we've discussed that have been done repeatedly by Skruffs and Strudel? What makes you think it isnt ok to get upset about that? You only mention it long enough to get upset at Pwayne for not voting here:
Yet again, we see Pwayne making a lot of noise about weak cases and scummy behaviour, but no real action on his part. No unvote-vote or even a confirm vote to remind us that he still thinks I'm his top scum target.
No direct reference to their play at all. Yet you seem to think he needs to type "confirm vote TS" to make you happy? Why? At this point he is doing more defending and it wasnt long ago when he voted TS.) Here's an alternate Universe Post:
"Pwayne seemed overdefensive when he aggressively went after Cicero for buddying up. I think they must have something to hide" I don't know if you are doing it on purpose but this is all just "control the play" posting or "Tying hands" posting. So the whole message is "Pwayne, shut up while we lynch Cicero". And then you switch to this:
Given his postings, I'm finding it hard to imagine Pwayne as scum without Cicero as scum. I'm starting to rethink lumping Cicero into my probably town bucket.
This is the second part of the plan. "Guys let's lynch Cicero not Pwayne. That'll test them both for me."
Why is it difficult to imagine Pwayne as scum without me as scum? Please elaborate on your justification for clearing Pwayne when I come up town.
Cicero has been sliding downhill fast. At times he seems frustrated, which can be a bit of a townie tell (either that or he's angry with how hard he's being bussed by TS).
Im positive I've seen a post like this from you in another game. I don't always stay quiet and logical. I can get frustrated. You know that already I think. It isnt a townie tell or a scumtell. It's a Cicero tell. Pwayne referenced it from our last game as well.
As for TS, is she a vanilla townie or is she bussing me? Was I bussing her first? Since it is clear that I voted her first. Then re-voted her which is when she turned her attention to me. Is it me and Pwayne and TS all as scum?
His continued insistence to press for SSF/whomever the new flake is while we've got warm bodies to interrogate is a little concerning.
I'm voting Strudel not Flea. I voted her twice today. Flea gets referenced at this point because of things like me not being accused of scumhunting or what have you. It's used as evidence of my past play.
I'm also worried that his "I know you're town" comment to TS was a little scum slip.
I said "You know you are town". It was a reference to her repeated vanilla townie claims. Towns need to read for context if they want to accurately catch scum. I said "you know you're town. Great. I know I'm town". Which was used to point out the uselessness of "I know I'm town" statements.
He's way off base in calling TS' town claim defense WIFOM. It's just poor strategy (not WIFOM) for a power role to claim vanilla when under pressure.
WIFOM is used when there is an optimal strategy and a sub-optimal strategy and someone suggests you are using the sub-optimal strategy because it is the opposite of what they would expect you to do. That was my point. I was making a faux WIFOM case because a core of the accusations against me are based on me playing sub-optimally on purpose. That is the core of the Cicero-Gorgon buddy case.
That having been said, I don't put anything past Strudel though. It is quite within her nature to say she is vanilla townie when she is either a power role or scum. Or should I refuse to vote anyone who claims vanilla townie? Does that claim only make sense when one is, in fact, a vanilla townie? What are your thoughts on that Hackerhuck because...
Vanilla is an easy fallback lynch and she would be lynched on the spot if she had to reclaim her real role if in real danger of being lynched. It also makes her unconfirmable/unbelievable when she does perform night actions.
the above isnt true at all. All you have to do is say "ok I really am the vigilante" and some people would still pause. Especially if you leave a breadcrumb for the purpose.
To top it off, making that supposition is either role-fishing or sending a subtle message to one's scum partner in the off chance that one is lynched.
What does this mean?
Now he's throwing stones at Shaka for what I see to be an "egging on" kind of post. Pot stirring at this juncture would be a bit scummy, but I see Shaka's post as giving you a little rope.
Speak without metaphor here for me. Shaka's post was exactly that - an egg on post. It was pot stirring. If he wants to ask me real questions I'll answer them. Please show me the "rope" you think it would be useful to use, except for the rope designed to hang myself.
All in all, I feel much worse about Cicero than I did before, and about the same with TS and Pwayne. I'm still happy with where my vote is, but I'm watching these events closely.
You mean happy to add some rope to the lynching without actually climbing on yourself yet? Noted. There's nothing accidental in this post at all.
If that isnt the point of your post, it's definitely how it reads. Can you see that?
