Dies to Removal

Oh, I targeted red night 1, no way was was I going to let him die early.

Also, lol at manders vt

Called it

Yes, you are misinterpreting.
Now come up with a good reason to investigate him or let him be, he's confirmed town.
If you think I'm throwing myself under the bus to save him you can just investigate him tomorrow.

Pedro targeted you and saw you target stardust.. You say this..

"I confirm I targeted Stardust last night but the only info I got from that is that Pedro is a Tracker, and probably Town"

And since i literally just woke up i read that at face value instead of pulling the implication out.

Tell me if this is true:
Pedro targeted and sae you target stardust.
You confirm you targeted stardust, but wont say what with. And also believe pedro to be town at this point based on his claim.

From what i can tell, you and pedro are claiming to have the same ability. Unless im misinterpereting whats going on. in which case, please clarify.

I've got nothing to explain, technically.
I confirm I targeted Stardust last night but the only info I got from that is that Pedro is a Tracker, and probably Town (Mafia Trackers are a thing, but at that point he would have played differently imho).

Worst claim ever.
In fact, not even a claim.

Red, actually claim.
Pedro, did you target rednihilist or stardust last night?

And the no scum double voter is a valid argument.

The counterpoint to which being 'unbalanced setup can be unbalanced' is kind of disappointing.

And, thinking back, i want to say that hes gone dark day2 of every game on this site ive been in with him and he's been town every time. Correlation and not causation, but it could be a tell.

And the no scum double voter is a valid argument.

Ha. Nice.

unvote

Why did you just unvote?

Because this red thing could get interesting.

Ha. Nice.

unvote

Hams vote had nothing to do with mine. I was talking to you. And since you didnt have an alternative, i voted the thing that made the most sense.

Oh, I'm not - I've already got enough info to warrant you he's town.
The problem is that he's misinterpreting his info, but at least that clears him.

I always forget that youre esl.
Hes calling you scum.

I know this sounds stupid, but that's good news.
The "he got pretty aggressive with me" is nonsense though.

Im looking forward to hearing his case as well.

I also dont think its out of character for stardust to have voted hunt since he thought he was scum.

Especiall since he could leave that clue for us so when he dies we have a confirmed scum.

Theres no pressure to try to push a lynch onto kpaca day1 without his (stardusts) role being confirmed. Which it is now.

Ham i think we're on the same page.

I don't believe Stardust CAN ask about alignment. That particular subject is game-breaking and, as a mod, I wouldn't allow it.

For this reason, I will not vote kpaca based on y'alls theory.

Worst argument ever.

Vote MJ, I am not a fan of mod votes

*shakes his Magic 8-ball*

"It is certain."

Okay then.

Vote Mogadishu Jones.

Yeah, what you quoted makes less sense. Occams razor.

vote kpaca

Look at literally stardusts first post

Are you scum or just stupid?
We absolutely have evidence that kpaca is scum

I dont care what kind of meta bullshit angle youre going to try to use against tordeck. This is more important.

Then youd best explain why and come up with something better.

Lynching kpaca of course

Ill read some gr stuff i guess. Lemme know if you have a better plan than the obvious thing manders.

Nice

Because it's the point of the game... Killing Scum and staying alive as long as you can to help your team.

Wanna help my team win.

Who are you voting for again?

I dont think claiming pgo makes sense if you are a pgo.

Im not going to try to crop down stardusts post because mobile. But ill do some analysis later.
For now, what's fishy is literally the post before i said that.

Somethings fishy

vote stardust

His line of thinking just makes no sense.

Hi. Yes. See post 92

So there are 5 people with 1 vote on them and you vote for kpaca.

I didn't know where we sat on the votecount, but Hunter voting for kpaca was meaningful since Hunter himself was under scrutiny. If Manders was correct that Hunter was scum, me making his vote more legitimate does give more information on other players. And, yes, kpaca can't be arsed to do much he doesn't want to do, but he does react to votes as much as the next guy, sometimes in an over-the-top angry kind of way.

What should I have done with my vote instead, in your opinion?

I get it i think. It just doesnt seem sound to me.

Wouldnt it have been easier to get people to jump on kpaca(or anyone) with even the flimsiest of accusations? How does your naked vote compel anyone to join your wagon?

I wouldve liked you to have put some thought into/ explained your vote i guess, regardless of who you wanted to see lynched.

Nothing in particular. Pretty much what I listed above.

You were hoping to get a wagon going on kpaca with one naked vote?

I dont understand your thought process here stardust.

Hunter was voting him too. It's not that I was trying to get a wagon going on kpaca. The image of there being a wagon gives information on choices that other players make. Do they join the kpaca wagon? Do they vote somewhere else? Do they question my vote, or do they ignore it? All that stuff makes a vote on kpaca more valuable than a simple unvote.

Also, hunt responded to manders.

I know. I don't have time right now to get into that. I haven't even read Manders' big post in detail yet.

So there are 5 people with 1 vote on them and you vote for kpaca.
Instead of picking any of the more active people or even newer people and applying some kind of pressure to them about literally anything. And, yknow, contributing. You vote someone who cannot be compelled to do anything he doesnt want to as some kind of roundabout way of maybe getting someone who isnt paying any attention at all to focus on kpaca?

Do i have a solid understanding of this situation?

Not right now, more null. And since i dont have to make a read on you, im not gonna worry about that and instead focus on what ive been doing.

Ok Manders. After that big post I am comfortable enough to say I was wrong.

unvote

Post 52?

I have an idea or two, but im not going to post them until im satisfied with his explanations and maybe not even then.
But trying to start a wagon or get a reaction from kpaca with that post is nonsense.

Nothing in particular. Pretty much what I listed above.

You were hoping to get a wagon going on kpaca with one naked vote?

I dont understand your thought process here stardust.

Also, hunt responded to manders.

What do you think he was trying to do?

And did he? Lemme check, I'm pretty sure I asked a follow-up question.

I dont know what he was trying to do, thats why im asking. That way, we can refer to it later if necessary.

he responded to post 52 in post 62, however poorly. Stardust said he would see how hunt responded in post 58.
The post you just quoted him not responding to is your post #63.
Not that you didnt follow up, but he did respond.

Nothing in particular. Pretty much what I listed above.

You were hoping to get a wagon going on kpaca with one naked vote?

I dont understand your thought process here stardust.

Also, hunt responded to manders.

What info were you hoping to get?

kpaca is immune to prods. Prods also get less info into the thread.

What info does your vote give us?

So you voted him because he's been onsite and not playing? Why not ask for a prod?