I voted.
Brasas: Is it really? I thought the emphasis was on the rhetorical clapping up to the :) and then on the concluding question - the first ironic, and the latter with its implication that liberal ZFR giving no thought to me being liberal as well is extremely myopic.
As to the liberal majority, I am trying to tell ZFR that he needs to be play for the team, sacrifice even. And I am still surprised you / RW didn't take the angle that I am telling my scum buddy ZFR that he needs to roll over for being bussed. It even makes me wonder if he is Hitler and you can't let him go under.
If you read parts 2, 3 and 5 of my ramblings you'll note that ZFR is mentioned as a possible Hitler/fascist candidate.
Brasas: what exactly do you see as the information being given to Hitler here?
Who some of the fascists are.
Brasas: And indeed it's pretty much a mix of a b c with some nuance to correct:
a) I scum hunt
b) I'm busy and lazy and the game is moving slow with significant breaks
c) my team is one Liberal policy from winning and was 3-0 with near zero effort from me and 4-1 with some more so not sure how much more contribution I need to provide.
Is this too risky? You say so, but maybe support that judgement, because to me odds are still looking pretty good. I would agree that abrasive hunting can be read as scummy, but one Liberal being judged scummy for his hunting approach is an ok sacrifice for the potential clarity it might get the other 5 colleagues.
For starters, it's 4-2. Relaxing at 3-0 is one thing, but now?
Liberals: 1 policy away from winning
Fascists: 1 policy and 1 successful chancellor nomination away
Not exactly a substantial lead, especially considering the remaining cards. And of the 6 players that have participated in governments so far, 4 gave us fascist policies, either by design or bad luck.
Lifthrasil: Do you really think that Brasas would be so stupid to bold it, if it was a slip? Or did I misunderstand your point?
My point was that it could be a deliberate hint for Hitler.
supplementscene: The most blatant teamplay was when Adalia was vouching for your predecessor RWarehall and the constant vouching of ZFR/RWarehall/Adalia all for each other.
Why would they assume ZFR/RWarehall/Adalia are all Liberal if they had no knowledge of one and other? I don't assume anyone is Liberal other than probably Lift. But they were all very sure each other were all Liberal all the way through. Only when questioned on this did they try to seem less obvious and state 'maybe one of my buddies is Fascist, but he probably isn't'.
So... you do assume after all and in favor of someone that passed fascist policy too. Interesting.
There was no vouching. And I already pointed you at posts that prove it:
ZFR: To be honest, I was actually thinking you investigate RW. His latest actions are a bit... odd
ZFR: If we're voting then RW is my first pick to investigate, dedo second.
ZFR: I stand by my orig8nal preference. Investigate RW or dedo.
How much more anti-vouching can you get that requesting an investigation?
supplementscene: Also as for ZFR rejecting his chancellorship.
He had no reason to suspect Kusu while
the rest of us had reasons to either suspect others or bank on a likely Liberal President. This explanation has been gone over ad-nausium, which you will have read, ignored and spun this same question that RWarehall/ZFR asked again as a defense for ZFR, your Scum buddy.
Why exactly is ZFR disallowed from having reasons to distrust kusu at that point in the game while everyone else gets to suspect whoever they want? This tells me you've been deliberately targeting him from the get go and are just grasping for excuses. Pretty fascist looking imo. Question is, are you merely targeting ZFR or are you doing it because kusu was involved and you panicked?
supplementscene: Avoiding discussion is anti-Liberal, that's pretty obvious.
...You don't say. "As no one has firm opinions on my presidency so let's get the ball rolling," Weren't you avoiding discussion when you hurried to nominate a chancellor without waiting for the new player to get her bearings?
supplementscene: Why exactly are you taking the exact same interpretation as RWarehall and defending ZFR to the hilt? Why is ZFR beyond reproach from both RWarehall's and Ashwald's perspectives? Why would Ashwald himself not suspect ZFR?
What I am doing is pointing out falsehoods. "He rejected that chancellorship and now I think he's most likely fascist" by itself would be reasonable. I don't see it as particularly significant *all by itself*, since plenty of others did the same including you. Still. Could be reasonable. Unfortunately for you, you went and said that thing above... Meanwhile "These three are constantly vouching for each other!" is a lie.
And as I told Brasas earlier, in parts 2, 3 and 5 of my mega-post ZFR is mentioned as a possible Hitler/fascist candidate.
supplementscene: As for
your claims that I accused The Greek. This is inaccurate. I said there was a possibility that The Greek was Hitler/Fascist from the odds presented to us. Where as ZFR/Adalia/RWarehall all accused the Greek before and after his presidency. Suspecting him prior to Greeks government is poor play on their part as it gives them away when they could have waited and then attacked him.
And here you are, blatantly lying. Again.
ashwald: and let me add here that
you said you also suspect greeklover of being Hitler, yet for some reason you readily support his pick for chancellor.
These are my exact words. And you are looking all the more fascist by the second.
greeklover: We appreciate ashwald's participation and we respect her effort but that's it. Her posts are similar to RW's posts. Some valid points, some twisting stuff, putting words in others' mouths, isolating phrases and presenting them out of context, interpreting things the way that suits her etc. I don't have time or energy to quote and reply, do your research yourselves.
@Lift I understand that you are trying to have a cool head but I don't see how being so neutral helps liberals. You are the most confirmed liberal right now, btw not because I am not trusted enough but because there is a chance I am Hitler. The party is ending, when will you start dancing? Call out someone, make some fuss, create some conflicts! Millions of spectators are watching us, I don't want them to say it was the most boring Secret Hitler ever.
Mods, I think you shouldn't indicate when a person changes his vote, this is supposed to be secret, right?
Now of course I have to ask kusu. What was your first vote and why/when did you change it?
"Isolating phrases"? You're saying you'd rather I had quoted all those posts in their entirety? And interpreting is what liberals do, since we lack info and no one is out there stage-whispering hints at us.
So you accuse me of twisting stuff and putting words in people's mouths (I will assume here that you mean I lie since you later use "interpreting" as a separate accusation) but you don't actually quote a single instance to back it up. You don't have anything to back it up. You're simply mudslinging. You don't say I misunderstood you, you don't have anything to say to defend yourself you try to be dismissive instead.
How is lift the most confirmed liberal exactly? You did his investigation after the two of you passed fascist policy and you're possible-Hitler/fascist for matters in addition to that policy. He's been making far far less negative noise though. Whether that is good Hitlerism or good liberalism, I still can't decide.
Brasas: Anyway, the "your" thing, which I didn't remember I had bolded was really highlighting to ZFR that I didn't believe the liberal majority is actually his.
Could you please elaborate on this when you make that post?
Brasas: I'd like more analysis from her of ZFR and you and dedo for example.
LIft and dedo: their thread participation is more or less neutral, and they aren't involved in player conflicts far as I recall. Yet both passed fascist policy. Then there's greeklover's comment when the investigation result came out: "Lift is a llllllllliberal, yeah! It seems that all fascists voted yes for the lift-me government in order to not betray themselves." This makes part of my brain go "OMG ACTUAL HITLER!!!!!1!!". Nothing concrete though.
ZFR randomly (to observer-me anyway) said no to chancellorship because kusu might have been planning to set him up. If he's a liberal then I don't get it but whatever. Gut feelings happen, regardless of accuracy. If a fascist, perhaps he had different plans brewing or perhaps he wanted to make kusu look suspicious. If he's Hitler, again I don't get it. It was a perfect chance to get cred and that's the simplest strategy to go for: get cred early, be re-elected after 3 fascist policies. Still, it's not like I haven't entertained theories of a bold Hitler before.
And speaking of bold Hitler/fascist candidates, it seems I missed an assassination reference from greek:
greeklover: We are doing so great. One risks being branded a "grammar nazi" and another one lies about his past. How am I supposed to trust anyone here? Maybe I should assassinate all of you just be sure. But that would be fascist, right;) ;) ;)
Since it's the very first it could be a joke at this point. Or allegience signaling number one. If it was the only mention, I'd definitely have dismissed it as a joke.