Problem is, Leonard, what if we don't lynch you?

Are we going to get more content out of you? Not if the past is any indication.
Are we going to find a convincing way of determining you are town? Not without an enormous waste of effort on the part of the Cop.

Basically town will be left with an un-investigatable lurker, and we'll have to find someone else to lynch.

Sorry, but vote stays.

My vote stays too.


Have we gotten to the point were we all feel we said our piece and now we are just waiting for one of the non Leonard hold outs to give in and swing the hammer?

I wonder if Krypysn's bottle is speaking to him today.

Sure, let's go with that :P. Honestly... I needed to put my vote someplace, and you were convenient for a number of reasons. Not least of which because I think you are scummy. ;)

I moved my vote off Leonard03, because town learns nothing new if I am on the wagon when he is lynched (which seems quite likely). However, forcing other, less confirmed, players to vote for him could be informative.

In case it wasn't clear, I'm not feeling particularly suicidal. :)

However slim the chance, it is still greater than any new information that can be gleaned from my vote.

It all adds up.

Ahhh...
You're wrong about me being scummy, but I understand.

Your point about information is good, though.

I am not trying to get you to change your vote. If I provide a faulty reason for voting for a player, I hope someone points it out. Whether I chose to acknowledge the fault, change my vote or vote for other reasons is up to me. The same holds true for you. I asked you to consider if your stated reason for voting loses its persuasiveness when considered inside of the full context. Apparently, your answer is no.

So then my question is, why do we disagree? If Leonard’s statement within its full context can be easily interpreted as both yours and mine, then we may merely have a matter of different interpretations. Two town butting heads. If we simply disagree, that’s fine. I’ve not ruled out this possibility entirely, but it currently doesn’t feel that way. Instead of just answering the question, you begin with conjecture and answer the question last. Your responses about the hammer felt that way as well, more defensive/reactive than expected for a town player. My vote stands.

For clarity’s sake: No one should feel sorry for Leonard or give him a break. He should be evaluated solely on his play. I recognize reasons to vote for him.

@Sage – that partly answers your question, I have more to add in another post

I see a lot has happened since morning. I would like to get my other reads on the table before the hammer, working on that now.

My last post should have been in response to this post by trent:

I am not trying to get you to change your vote. If I provide a faulty reason for voting for a player, I hope someone points it out. Whether I chose to acknowledge the fault, change my vote or vote for other reasons is up to me. The same holds true for you. I asked you to consider if your stated reason for voting loses its persuasiveness when considered inside of the full context. Apparently, your answer is no.

So then my question is, why do we disagree? If Leonard’s statement within its full context can be easily interpreted as both yours and mine, then we may merely have a matter of different interpretations. Two town butting heads. If we simply disagree, that’s fine. I’ve not ruled out this possibility entirely, but it currently doesn’t feel that way. Instead of just answering the question, you begin with conjecture and answer the question last. Your responses about the hammer felt that way as well, more defensive/reactive than expected for a town player. My vote stands.

For clarity’s sake: No one should feel sorry for Leonard or give him a break. He should be evaluated solely on his play. I recognize reasons to vote for him.

@Sage – that partly answers your question, I have more to add in another post

I see a lot has happened since morning. I would like to get my other reads on the table before the hammer, working on that now.

I’ve already mentioned my position on Leonard and trent.

Apart from trent’s behavior Today, I didn’t feel like I was coming up with much regarding who I thought was scummy, so I took a different approach. I made a list of who I thought was town. When that list was done, I was left with the following:

Agentcarr
CSPVG
Flubb
RWarehall
Trent

I believe the remaining scum and third party (I’m going with a single arsonist) are in this group. Assuming 3-4 anti-town players remain, 1-2 of these must be town. If I am wrong about Leonard, there is one more town in my list. For now, I want my vote to be with who I think is actual scum or third party. I will hammer Leonard if none of the above seem viable. (Not looking good Leonard)

I need to re-read the listed players to give decent feedback. Leaving for supper and will post when I return if hammer has not occurred.

In case it's not clear, I believe Krypsyn (duh), Sage, JMich, yogs, and bler are town.

A little mood music.

Oh, I was anticipating the Final Jeopardy tune.

I do not trust RW at all. I think he needs to be looked at very very closely when we come back.

@yogs -Thank you for the music. I have now spent the better part of 10 minutes listening to Break The Ice and Thunder in your Heart from the Movie Rad.. Your clip reminded me of better times.

Did someone say Jeopardy!

Well, this goes against pretty much everything I said earlier, but if there's a desire to look at RW specifically, there's at least an argument for doing it with Kryp still spry and present, rather than waiting on Day 3. Just sayin'

His last post was 1006, and that was just to ask Cristi to clarify something.

That said, I was mostly logging in to say I'm exhausted and a bit depressed (IRL), actually. Not that that's all y'all's problem. But I don't think I'm going to be able to add anything useful tonight. Even the point above wasn'tt something I've thought through whether it's good/bad/indifferent, just a kneejerk reaction. Gonna turn in and read a book I think.

True, very true.