So, NUKE, what are you suspicions now?
Well, my suspicions rest partly on BASICALLY EVERYONE because this day has been as productive as bringing coals to newcastle.
But currently, I really, honestly am suspicious of Dariush- I feel he is using his 'always attack NUKE' meta to hide behind, allowing him to lurk the day away, content that his nullmeta will keep him safe. He employed a similar strategy in Occam's. Where it worked pretty much perfectly and let him scumlurk the game away.
It's a preemptive defense, and I have to agree it's kinda scummy to worry about being called on something enough to point it out and explain it away before anyone calls attention to it. Are you so nervous about being attacked that you have to preemptively sore up any holes you see?
May I refer you to this replyOttofar, uh. Attacking someone for shitty reasons won't work out for... anyone, I think either providing an actual case or unvoting would be a more viable strategy.
Also, being less of a condescending ass. You aren't right, your 'case' is horrible, and you should feel bad for how you choose to play.
So lets start day 2!
3 days late, but sure, why not.
Nuke: After your no lynch policy of yesterday did you get enough out of the night to make your idea worthwhile?
Um, yes. I did. Were you not paying attention. My stance that the town has powerful roles, including investigative ones, has been proven valid. We received information about how many scum there is. We received information regarding the alignments of three players. And we didn't have to lynch(kill) anyone. Frankly, if we had, I don't think we would have gained significantly more information.
So, Dariush. Tell me, who besides NUKE are you suspicious of? I've yet to see a solid opinion on anyone else.
...Is Nuke some kind of scum leader, lynching whom will kill off the entire scumteam, that already the second person vomits his guts attempting to defend him? Now I'm suspicious of you because of your idiotic defence of Nuke. As I've said elsewhere, I prefer to focus on one target at a time. Can you argue against specific points of my case against him? Or do you know something about him we don't?
Ok, guy, seriously.
This makes you sound like an incredible tunnelling idiot.
When you get the feeling that there is an implausible conspiracy required to maintain your case, that may be a sign that you should take a good look at said case from a neutral perspective, and re-evaluate its merits.
Jack: What are your thoughts on the actual scumminess of people? You posted a lot of two questions, but not many opinions.
Toaster: Whilst you are prodding ECoF, give Darvi one too. And perhaps Powder Miner as well.