Boc @ 15/6/2015 0:10

Moose @ 14/6/2015 23:06 Craig may become active, but for now, I'm looking at Alsark more. I don't have anything concrete yet, though, so I may be looking at him for the wrong reasons. can we not just throw out random "I find this guy suspicious" comments without anything to back them up? It's pretty counter-productive and even a tad scummy since it's so easy to backpedal from

Gonna make a quick reply while catching up. I am not more suspicious for no reason. I have a reason, but I don't want to say it yet. Trust me, guys.

Tricks @ 15/6/2015 0:11

you have a reason you'd like to keep to yourself but you don't have anything concrete? that makes zero sense

I worded it wrong. I have something, but idk what to do with it.

Hey guys, just got home from work.

ANGI CATCH ME UP!!!

Also ##lynch Christian

Christian seems suspicious based on the absolutely nothing I've read about today so far

Vernon has 4 lynch votes I think. Teebs has 3.

If we're gonna tale out an inactive, I'd rather take out Teebs since Vernon is usually active.

Lol, what will be will be. I'm busy now though.

I love Herm so his suggestion appeals to me. ##LynchTeebs

Colby @ 15/6/2015 15:27

Moose, I think whatever intel you have on Alsark should probably be expressed. I agree with what a few other people have said about you now having somewhat of a target on your back for that, so at this point it's best to express what you have to say on the matter.

I'll be fine with it if anyone else agrees. Whether I have a target on my back or not, whatever. With my luck, it'll just be nothing.

Moose @ 15/6/2015 18:13

Colby @ 15/6/2015 15:27 Moose, I think whatever intel you have on Alsark should probably be expressed. I agree with what a few other people have said about you now having somewhat of a target on your back for that, so at this point it's best to express what you have to say on the matter. I'll be fine with it if anyone else agrees. Whether I have a target on my back or not, whatever. With my luck, it'll just be nothing.

it's really stupid not to just say it if you have something. If you really don't have anything legitimate you should've kept it to yourself, but now that you're hinting at it you might as well spill it all since you've just heightened the chances that you get killed tonight

Moose @ 15/6/2015 18:01

Boc @ 15/6/2015 0:10 Moose @ 14/6/2015 23:06 Craig may become active, but for now, I'm looking at Alsark more. I don't have anything concrete yet, though, so I may be looking at him for the wrong reasons. can we not just throw out random "I find this guy suspicious" comments without anything to back them up? It's pretty counter-productive and even a tad scummy since it's so easy to backpedal from Gonna make a quick reply while catching up. I am not more suspicious for no reason. I have a reason, but I don't want to say it yet. Trust me, guys. Tricks @ 15/6/2015 0:11 you have a reason you'd like to keep to yourself but you don't have anything concrete? that makes zero sense I worded it wrong. I have something, but idk what to do with it.

moose you don't understand. let me spell it out for you

scenario one: you reveal your reason.
best case scenario: your reason is valid; maybe you get killed tonight, maybe you don't, but we have reason to lynch scum alsark.
worst case scenario: we figure out that your reason is not valid. maybe you get killed but we still have that out in the open

scenario two: you don't reveal your reason.
best case scenario: you wait to reveal your reason until we have more to go on, then we lynch scum alsark.
worst case scenario: alsark is not scum. scum kills you tonight. we spend all of day 3 debating whether or not they killed you because you were right, or because they wanted to frame alsark as town. we lynch alsark.

the fact that you even have a reason to suspect him that you aren't revealing has ALREADY done the damage. if your info checks out then we have protective roles if you're really that concerned about dying in a game that is not about survival

Alsark visited Cake last night. I'm thinking he might be scum doc.

Herm @ 15/6/2015 17:32

I don't think Vernon or Teebs are scum, at best they're inactive scum. Scum's usually not completely inactive, there's usually some sort of survival mechanism involved. When I lynched Shawn he at least showed up. Taking out Vernon or Teebs or Wikey today feels like taking out Tony yesterday.

well yeah it is exactly like taking tony out yesterday except that they could have any alignment. i stand by taking out tony. having a complete inactive around if it gets down to a lynch or lose situation is as bad as having an extra scum player because we can't rely on their vote to help us remove scum

Moose @ 15/6/2015 18:24

Alsark visited Cake last night. I'm thinking he might be scum doc.

that is such a ridiculous leap to make off that info. alsark knows cake from another board, she's a logical choice for him to use any sort of role on

thank you for sharing, now we can dismiss it and move on

I think I'm just gonna stick with my DD vote since, even though he responded, it's not like he brought too much to the table. Not sure why it was enough for some people to back off

I don't mind Vic/Wikey/Teebs getting lynched I guess, but they all legitimately haven't been on since this day started (not sure how much better that is in the long run, but it's less suspicious)

It was the first thought that popped in my head. Sue me.