[Giraffe]

Originally Posted by Romanic

That's not even true, you're getting mixed up in your lies. You voted Zeener in #48 before mitchy made his case against him.

And then in #49, three minutes later, I posted the following:

Originally Posted by Giraffe

NETA: I know it's dumb to use two votes to vote for two different people, since I'm basically voting against myself. Before the Day is over, I'll choose my most likely candidate and either remove a vote or double up.

Originally Posted by Romanic

It's so clear anyway that you are just looking for reasons to place your votes, rather than actually being looking for Scum. A normal Townie reaction when someone vouch strongly for another player, would be to wonder why, and be worried about accusing a possible pro-Town role. Yet when Zeener vouched for me, you charged at him like you've found a gold mine, not bothered by the possibility that he could have been scanner.

I'm glad you know who everyone is and whose word should be taken seriously. Town can't ever be too credulous, right?

You're right, I didn't bother with the possibility that Zeener might be a scanner. You know why? Because the role you claimed returns scum when investigated. Remember? It's one of the more troubling aspects of your role, the fact that you're the one player we know can't be confirmed Town.

And I didn't "charge at Zeener", I expressed surprise that a Town player would so strongly argue against voting to lynch a player claiming your role. I then put a vote on him, on top of the one I had on you, followed by a promise to make a decision before Day's end on which I thought was scummier. That was you, up until moody's post.

Originally Posted by Romanic

Just like zuma and Lucifer, who went after Idle for not claiming immediately on Day 1, when he could have been an important Town role. Just like Lucifer who went after me for protecting Idle, not worrying about masons.

Scum lie. Town have to try to root out those lies. How can Town do that if players don't dare put votes on people you feel could potentially have important roles (despite not having yet claimed)? The lack of a claim from Idle seemed weak to me, but given the noise that was made about it in the last game, it hardly seemed beyond the pale.

Originally Posted by Romanic

Let's make it clear once and for all, Giraffe:

I know you are scum, and I know you are faking being suspicious of me. Future argument between us are completely unnecessary.

No you don't. You think I am scum. Or you yourself are scum and you know I am Town. The one thing you don't know for a fact is that I am scum.

And no need to end the discussion, even if our respective minds are made up. Discussion helps Town, silence helps scum. Even if you're Town and I'm scum, wouldn't it benefit Town for you to provide a logical explanation of your actions without getting defensive or angry?

For example, why did you leave separate votes on Ulla and Zuma? (I'm not trying to build a case against you here, by the way, I'm honestly curious.) You seem to feel it was pretty obvious Zuma was scummy, at least compared with Zeener, so why waste a vote on Ulla?

I have the same question for BillMc, actually. Why use two votes for two different people? How can that not be a wasted vote?