I may be biased but I love the way Blair presented her Starbuck case. It really shows how clear Blair was about why she had voted iamausername and how it was other people, not her, who cared about iamausername having just two posts. I kinda scratched my head when Starbuck called that vote policy, but seeing it right there in one place like that really shows how badly Starbuck misrepped Blair.
Starbuck, how did that post confirm for you that you should be voting Blair? Where do you see scum motivation in the way she explained her position?
<- Typed that before I saw Starbuck call it OMGUS. I can't see where Blair would be so threatened by that one vote she'd resort to OMGUS, which scum tend to avoid because they know it looks bad anyway, but ok I guess...
I'm a little confused why so few people have talked about Starbuck much less voted there. Between the reactions to myself and green crayons voting her, the misrep of Blair and discrediting of the iamausername votes based on post count, and this OMGUS accusation, I just don't see how anyone has a town read on Starbuck or doesn't find her posting notable.
Like what does this even mean:
Cantlynchapuppy to Starbuck wrote:
you're being inconsistent, but inconsistent in a town way
And how does this equal town even if it's true:
ABR wrote:
Starbuck is always scummy in my experience. I think you guys are getting a false positive.
llamarble wrote:
I don't think Crayons is particularly town that his wagon needs to dissolve; I prefer it over Starbuck's,
^The off handed comment shows apathy towards Starbuck and I don't see why. Llamarble, I know you had Starbuck as town in your original reads list but did you ever say why? Csn you either quote it for me if you did or elaborate now if you didn't?
More apathy:
Green Crayons wrote:
I’m going to have to actually reread the Blair/Starbuck thing but my skimming as I glanced at the thread about when it was happening looked pretty tvt
Reck wrote:
i skimmed it all but i really dont recall anything fun or exciting other than the starbuck wagon happening and me wanting to ignore it for now
_____________
hoopla wrote:
it looks to me like auro has been deliberately subverting the expectations of the typical townie blueprint on D1. the no-lynch joke, the theory discussion in lieu of actual scumhunting, the early spamming seemingly devoid of depth. these actions can easily be interpreted as suspicious, because his entire posting appears to go against the grain. but the fact he is self-aware that he goes against the grain and does it anyway seems like a town mindset. a town mind resolute in playstyle, come what may from people's reactions - the following quotes from post 275 being prime examples;
That describes Auro's play pretty much exactly how I see it except that I'm not sure whether to call it town or scum play. It just looks more like the newer site meta. All of this just feels like the new style of play. It's kind of screw around until something catches your attention or deadline gets close. That makes it hard to have a read on this kind of player for most of Day 1 because it's easy for scum to duplicate that play.
Auro wrote:
And why do you think that's only my shtick as scum?
I don't think what I'm doing in thread is anti-town, for the record
I don't know your meta, but if farside is correct she makes a good point against you. Do you have examples of playing this way as town?
__________
I'll try to finish later. It's nice out and the kids want to enjoy it.
Probably at best I can say that I wouldn't be playing this way as scum to this particular oldbie p-list (prolly would go way heavier on the sincerity part, like 
