AH, your last post did, indeed, not look good. Please clarify. So we can move onto more important people. Like Guardman. I'll get around to answering you soon, guarddog, don't worry. I plan to back up my bark with bite.
I'll use different words. Shadowknight is totally off with his reliance on roles (we don't have a lot to compare that to today) and flavor (has never been relevant) as evidence. He's reaching. And what he says about himself isn't reasonable in his assessment of self or me. If he's got a scummy name and a townie role, why doesn't he believe that's possible for anyone else? He also believes his role (not named) will clear him. I'm having trouble with a role doing clearing. It might explain some actions, but the role means as much as flavor does. As for the running out of time thing, we have a deadline, so time to try and find a consensus. It doesn't seem like anyone else finds Emo's actions suspect and I certainly find SK's actions suspect.
You're sure your claim is provable and yet describe it as extremely scummy. That feels like a prepared false claim to me. Your reliance on role analysis instead of play analysis is also suspect, especially on day one.
Paranoia. Yeah, something bad could happen. But if you don't try to turn this into an investigation, something already did. You, alive tomorrow with no confirmation for no conclusive reason turns things into a negative feedback WIFOM centered on you. You, dead tomorrow with no confirmation gives us nothing. If we know your target, something going wrong gives us information.
I've got news. For the mafia, it's a lose lose situation. Your role targeting a mafia memeber is bad. A confirmed townie pair is bad. But anything they do to interfere becomes significantly better if you don't name a target. So name a target.
Oh, very good. Try to remember that we are hunting scum here. Now is the time to find the best possible candidate for a lynch that we can agree on. I am in no way satisfied with today's resolution on Emo Pinata but in light of the current deadline I'd be fine with Guardman.
Emo: You commented on my reasoning, but you never explained how those actions weren't scummy.
Shadow Knight: I am not going to claim any further. It will not cast my actions in a remarkably different light, and is therefore irrelevant in determining my alignment.
I'd like you to point out how, because it certainly was not apologetic.
Quote from Emo_Pinata »
Sorry, I wanted the mod to do something. We had not had a vote count the entire game at that point, and were promised several times.
Quote from ZazZ234 »
"Now, may I ask you" Addressing Abandon Hope again. "why you haven't provided your reasoning earlier? What was your reason to desist such a thing, when I asked you for it? If your attitude is not defeatist, then what was this last comment meant to tell us, please?"
Previously your manner was elite and evasive. I don't respond well to assery. The last comment meant exactly what it said. Should I die (which might as well be when, this is mafia) I will be proof of a total disconect between names, alignment, and role. Also, Emo did not defend when he responded to my rationalization for voting for him. Go read the post (311), it's only four quote and responses.
Unvote: Emo Pinata,Vote: Shadow Knight.
You're sure your claim is provable and yet describe it as extremely scummy. That feels like a prepared false claim to me. Your reliance on role analysis instead of play analysis is also suspect, especially on day one.
I've got news. For the mafia, it's a lose lose situation. Your role targeting a mafia memeber is bad. A confirmed townie pair is bad. But anything they do to interfere becomes significantly better if you don't name a target. So name a target.
AE: Have you named a target yet?
No evasion. No defeatism. No claim.
Shadow Knight: I am not going to claim any further. It will not cast my actions in a remarkably different light, and is therefore irrelevant in determining my alignment.
Second, Emo's defense reads like an apology. It in no way defends.