Hinckley

I've seen this before and the accusation was wrong, but I still say nice catch. Has she ever done this before?

Vote: Sammy Sycamore (Fugazi) Bold added for emphasis ^ Again bold added for emphasis above and this last line seems to me like Sammy is the one trying to influence people about what to think about Alastair's alignment. I've posted most of the quotes that make me suspect Sammy. Again, you can click the arrow next to our names to see the quotes in context. Sammy's continued insistence that I tried to get everyone to believe Alasdair was Maple is what makes me even more suspicious of him than I was yesterday. He has tunnel vision on this issue and he takes what I say out of context or hand picks what he responds to. Insisting one thing when it's clear, at least to me, that it's not true makes me wonder why he's trying so hard to heap suspicion on me. I have the advantage of knowing I'm Town, so having someone misconstrue my words this way makes it clear to me they are Scum. Check the quotes I've posted. You can see all of mine, which postulate Alasdair's alignment going either way, were posted before all of Sammy's. He keeps insisting I was pushing very hard that Alasdair was Scum when I'm clearly, at least in my eyes, looking at all options. Not sure why a Townie would do this? If Sammy isn't Scum, then I propose he take a lesson in reading things more thoroughly. In the second to last quote he finals admits he sees I was considering other options but he says "half-heartedly" in order to conveniently accuse Catarina. What? I was half-heartedly accusing Catarina? I suspect her with all of my heart, damn it! Anyway, I find his behavior very strange. I still am not a big fan of Larry Larch or Catarina, either. I was suspecting Adelaide as well, but I feel less confident in that suspicion now. I can understand, after looking over the posts again, how what I said sounded odd. I'm not saying she's an Oak, but I'm less suspicious after looking everything over. In other news, through some behind-the-scenes claims, I can confidently say that Bruce is verified to be an Oak. That's good, huh? I'm sure this will get mixed reviews... William?

Why do you not want to discuss who you suspect with everyone? If you don't believe his claim, discussing suspicion with him in private might be a good way to suss him out. What did you glean from asking him about his claim?

It's basically the definition of filler. He talks in circles. And that random defending, just like my least favorite tree, Larry Larch, is very suspicious.

Can't people read? The bomb thought there might be more than one. Not me. Shall I draw a diagram?

Regarding Clem's suspicion of Bobby: Several people pointed out this odd fluff. Blatant, brazenly so. Kind of a funny way to contribute. But it is ping-worthy. I know another tree who has tried it before or even endorses this type of response but he's speedy. I asked for clarification on this several times and he never gave it and ultimately ignored me and stopped answering. See? Ignoring accusations is Scummy. Answering to them is helpful. Got that, Nash? The original issue here was Berty telling Nash he must've meant Garden Variety Oak and Bobby didn't understand why the assumption was bad. He answers me that there were alternate possibilities to what Berty could mean. Yet he only answered one. I pressed several times for clarification. So, why did he never clarify this and why was he defending Berty anyway? It reminds me of my ping of Larry Larch. Defending people, without much reason, just trying to buddy up and appear helpful. Here are the rest of his posts. Click the arrow next to his name, it will take you to the Day One thread so you can see his post in context. (bold below added for emphasis) This didn't ping me, but it irked me. Freud's theories are not out of date. Did you vote for him because he was metagaming or because you thought he was Scum?

I also find it hard to believe that we had 2 maple kills last night. Unless they knew something about Buck, I can't imagine him being a threat to them. No offense, Buck. However, I was once part of a Scum team that got two kills one night. It was a unique situation but it happened...

Yes, it bugged me yesterday too. The post you quoted pinged me as well. I wasn't sure why until you put it so succinctly (you make me want to talk fancy too ).

My accusations of Adelaide and Sammy aren't defenses. I've been suspicious of them since yesterday as I stated. And my persistence about Sammy is because I felt he pounced on me when I suggested his private communication was suspicious. We don't even know the alignment of Alastair to confirm if the suspicion is warranted. When a suspicious person accuses me in a suspicious manner, I'm going to point it out. You can call it defensive, but I thought a vet like you would be able to tell the difference. So you are OK with trees that say "We should watch out for [this]" or "We should go out and analyze [that]" to appear helpful and busy yet never actually follow through? We've seen Scum hide there before. I've been backing up all of my suspicions by checking posts and PMs. Others should too. I can verify this.

No. I don't think there's more than one bomb. If someone else has the role of bomb I would say my bomb is lying. Right now I believe the claim. Saying why might give their identity away. I will say if the Scum orchestrated the approach it's a good one.

The bomb thought there could be other bombs and that's why there were two deaths Townie death's last night. He was worried either Buck or Lauren were the vig and that there was no Scum kill. I don't think this is the case, however. I think if a bomb went off, we'd know. They said they trusted me and I did warn them against confiding in me when I wasn't verified to them. Of course, there have been bomb claims from Scum in the past. However, this seemed to me like an organic way of revealing their role and a real concern for the Oaks. Great, so you're working on that for us, right? When can we expect your analysis?

Wouldn't every Oak need to know the code before they died? I can't imagine this working unless every Oak knew the code and we kept it from the Maples. If we could do that, we would've already won. This looks like you are trying to be helpful but can't really think like an Oak.

I think it's a good idea, but if the person is trusted, why can't they be told before the player is dead?

Because it wouldn't serve a purpose that I can think of. Do you think otherwise? I can't imagine a Scum stump sitting around so we can sit around and call it Scummy. Am I missing something?

Oh, really? I've played a lot of games and I must have completely missed that Oaks don't have to defend themselves. I'll let the Scum falsely put suspicion on me and misconstrue what I'm saying. Adelaide and Sammy both were highly suspicious to me yesterday and their misrepresentation of what I've said is even more concerning. Townies don't need to defend themselves? What game have you been playing? One where Townies get falsely sussed and they lay down for Oaks to manipulate? I highly doubt that.

Well, there is a little faction. That's the point of the game. Have you noticed? I think Sammy could be part of that little faction, so what do you propose I do? Good news, we have a bomb. Or at least that's the claim...

I even thought about that as I typed it as a neutral kill. "I should type Scum too" but I didn't but they are all possibilities along with all the many other explanations I postulated. Again, sorry I didn't type every single possibility. It's telling that you're so focused on it. I said that "rallying" was the only reason I could think of for Lauren being killed based on his posts. The fact that you're picking apart the speculation when I was clearly making the point about Chester having a narrow focus is also pinging me. Here's another theory: (yes, theory, not an insistence Scummy Adelaide and Sammy) Was Brickelodeon janitors because I was right that there were no Scum on the bandwagon and the wording of his request to Bruce was, as I suggested, very telling?

Oh, is that what I'm doing? So, you and Sammy are Scum buddies? I called that yesterday. So, this is no surprise at all. So, I'm pushing the theory that Alastair is Scum, huh? So you think he's not? Why are you reaching that conclusion? And are you suggesting what then? The Scum killed Buck? The Scum didn't kill? You say the Scum killed Lauren because he wasn't likely to be protected or watched. I made the same speculation about it being a neutral kill, which also applies to the Scum kill. Sorry I didn't apply every possibility to every situation and every possible hypothetical. I certainly tried. I tried to get all of that crap out of the way since so much of the day is usually wasted and so many people post fluff in random and somewhat useless speculation. But it is interesting that you're trying to suss me with false info. Again, anyone can read and see that you're misrepresenting what I'm saying. I'm also fascinated how you know what the Scum were thinking and what there's no way they were possibly thinking. But then you announce you don't know who the Scum killed. Thankfully you've assure us of that, we can stop suspecting you now. So this is the post you're referring to. And my point in this post is trying to convince people that Brickeolodeon is Scum? Are you annoyed because you janitored him for another reason and I'm getting it wrong. I speculate about everything I say in that post. And in case you didn't know...using series of ellipsises...which are the three dots...indicate...I might be...overthinking it...or that I'm still...thinking...the...possibilities...through. Sorry I didn't explain my whole thought process for you. At least I gave you the Scummy little hope that you could try to turn suspicion on me. But like your buddy Scummy SycaMapleFace, you're misrepresenting what I said.

I may not trust you, but this is a good analysis of the situation.

Look who knows so much about what the Scum would do! Tell us, Adelaide, then who did they target and why, Miss Maple? I did answer it, regardless of its nonsensical nature, Scummy McBristlePants. You are really Scummy. Three of who?

This question is kind of nonsense. I hardly understand it. There are more ways than stumps to reveal such things.

Can you explain this question? I don't understand it.

How does it help the Maples more? What if we lose the stumps altogether? What if the Scum have a rolecop or tracker? Isn't it better that we have the info that they might already have? It's one thing to add to the discussion, but you've rewound it to the beginning. That's so unhelpful and I find it Scummy. We're way past your speculation, respond to the current arguments. Are you reading everything we said about it? What about rolecops or trackers on the Scum side. How do the repercussions outweigh the benefits? Please explain.

You are so painfully Scummy. Which trees? And what would you call this? I call it asking for two more votes to get Brickelodeon lynched, or a "rally". Oh, really? Because I'm sure when I voted there still weren't enough votes to lynch Alastair. And I would vote for Larry again. Nothing inconsistent there. I switched my vote after Brickelodeon appealed to Bruce in private. It was Scummy. I stand by my read of Alastair's PM to Bruce. If he was Town, then it was an inexperienced move on his part. He defended Hazel? I don't remember this, so I will look back. I thought he just agree with Hazel that you were Scummy. It's all fuzzy. The three of you bickered a lot.

I don't know. I keep going back and forth. Remember, if the Scum have a role cop, they may already know what role one of them had. I've seen day role cops. That really smart and handsome Scum Viking we were talking about earlier who played investigator was basically a day role cop. I usually err on the side of caution that all info on the table is best for the Town. Scum have a lot of ways of learning things that the Town might never know or realize they've picked up. I really do think it's helpful to thoroughly discuss all possibilities before we decide on anything. Adelaide loves to lurk. There's an idea... Help me out. Why does that work?