Scaevola

Hmm maybe she could read the thread?

Vote: Berty Birch (Dragonfire) My antecedent comments speak for this vote.

What happened to your comment being fluff/common banter? You're contradicting yourself. Floundering even. You're caught in quite a predicament and it will be difficult to rebut the accusations against you. Your rebuttals are less lackluster than lacking sufficient justification. "I'm in deep s**t now so I'll rescind everything I said. Ok?"

Yes, I'm no longer very suspicious of Bruce for the PMing either. What I'm not satisfied with is his justifications for suspecting William. However, that's somewhat trivial and we have bigger fish to fry. I'd really like to discuss Berty for the lynch today. He posts once to fish around for roles and then puts up a lackluster defense for his actions. Larch, Pear, and Beech are irksome too. Nothing but fluff and hollow concurrences.

Asking if a tree is a PR or Vanilla doesn't seem like banter to me.

"I'm just speaking to cover up that I've added nothing," At least you're brutally honest. Does anyone care to comment regarding Birch's fishing? Or Birch perhaps you'd care to respond to the allegations against you?

Why then did he ask him to clarify that he is a plain oak with no power role? It is such a specific inquiry as opposed to the broader query of whether he is oak or other. His discourse would have been more oriented to his disbelief of his oakliness (oakness?) were that the case.

It's very questionable. It looks like Betty Birch may have been fishing for information regarding Ash's role. He's essentially asking if Nash Ash has a power role. Also, why at this point would anyone accuse anyone in privacy? We should really be collaborating and putting conjectures in the open. We have scant information, and any anecdotes could spark beneficial discussion regarding the accuser and the accused.

Only a maple wouldn't confide in a confirmed oak.

Oh dear those rotten maples. Why can't they cope with what they were habituated and set up to be? You'll excuse me if I don't confide in this as of yet.

Clem Elm present. Though I'm not likely to be anywhere else. Ever.

1. I've played two games thus far. 2. I have read the rules and am prepared to follow them. 3. Yes.

First of all, good job to the Town, you played a very strong game I must say, I thoroughly relished playing as scum. My early vote on Calanon was obviously a big mistake but overall I was fairly satisfied with my game play. I guess I had supposed the votes for Speedy would be regarded with no less suspicion, but as a veteran player I suppose people trusted him to be an effective speaker (and as I said before, chances are the speaker would be Town). Congratulations as well to my fellow Octan, the efficiency and collaboration of the team, with the guidance of TPRU really culminated into an effective group. I very much enjoyed working with you guys To Adam: The conversion PM was not a hoax, you were our conversion target until TPRU came forth that you had been forwarding the messages to the Town bloc. The message was made to be controversial if quoted (it was copied and pasted from the scumboard ), but it was mostly a fish for information if you'd be interested, and as a utility to generate controversy and confusion if you spurned it.

Thank you for having me! Go Octan !

Quite a gamble to take with our votes (but worthwhile). The investigator is insane and therefore it's possible he got a town role on you and a scum on me (not to say you're scum, but the results are random) I am a vanilla loyal.

Figurelli was blatantly scum. He claimed to have killed Rep. Karchevsky when you yourself said that "I've been talking to the watcher, they followed Kovacs night one. Someone targeted him, it wasn't you," Evidence enough for me. This case is just a null, black and white investigation result.

Figurelli's impeachment was backed by infallible anecdotal evidence. This investigation result is incorrect.

You refused to analyze my posts therefore I recycled my reasons.

At least I ought to vote for the real scum. Vote: Gerald Hatley (Goliath) Hatley tried to obstruct the lynch on Day 1. He's been nothing but fickle and volatile throughout these sessions, and indeed as mentioned prior has scrupulous worked to endear to the majority. Indeed, Dixon has all of you under his thumb. To an excruciating point.

Nails in a loyal coffin. My claim seems unlikely but I urge everyone to ruminate on it carefully and think for yourself.

What? Your cop must be an insane one or opposite. I'm Loyal and will turn up as so tomorrow should I be impeached. Firstly, I thought Addie was scummier. Were I not asleep I would've altered my vote. I voted for Palacios because his abstinence could have cost us an impeachment. Would you rather have paranoid and confused Day 1? That's what made it scummy. Also the lynch was not sealed on Nottingham when Palacios announced he would abstain. Palacios acted very scummily, I'd think a scum wouldn't want a Day 1 impeachment so the Loyals wouldn't have more information to go on. Before you all barrage me with votes, I'll say that Stanley and myself acted without coordination. I'm not tethered to the Octan corporation. The investigation result is wrong, therefore I'm inclined to believe the cop is insane or comes up with opposite results.

He was confirmed Octan because (see the eightieth post yesterday) Figurelli was counterclaimed with a night action (duh). Again, you are not reading for comprehension. You were the only bandwagoner (besides Spalding but he formatted his vote wrong, and Laughlin attempted to at days end) for Palacios. You voted after a vote was decided for a representative of unconfirmed allegiance (therefore an unexcused bandwagoning situation). Figurelli's was justified due to the surety of his allegiance. Time for you to interpret my comments (and others') instead of cannibalizing and contorting them. Whom is the real (albeit unsuccessful) manipulative here? I have an idea.

People voted after you. You could have helped seal an impeachment vote but risked a non-impeachment by keeping it up in the air. As I said, you were a late voter and thereby should have ensured its occurrence. I was sleeping when the decisive votes came in thereby could not alter my own. Day 2 however, the impeachment was already decided yet you still voted for the majority candidate. . Did you happen to notice everyone bandwagoned yesterday? And everyone was explicitly excused since it was certain Figurelli was scum. Interpret, don't just skim my comments. You're manipulating my words or seriously misinterpreting them to an excruciating point. When your votes came in, meager at best justifications were included with the voting posts. Just refer to your votes on Nottingham and Palacios.

Of course. For yourself Representative Hatley, I will again cite your vote on Day 1. You stuck your vote on the minority candidate when the attainment of an impeachment was looking uncertain, thereby conveying the idea you were attempting to obstruct an impeachment. As a late voter, you should have ensured its fruition. Your Day 2 bandwagon on Palacios was again calculated to bolster your reputation with the majority, reassuring you agreed with them when you could have abstained or voted for another. As for Tiny, his posts have really been elusive and insubstantial which seems quite scummy. For instance, his reasons for impeaching Nottingham and Palacios were very vague. Albeit this is a little questionable considering it was Rutherford who exposed the Octan Figurelli.