Donald Judd
-
Posts
16 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Everything posted by Donald Judd
-
It's nice to have your trust but I'm sorry that I can't reciprocate. I'm not confident that you're scum at all either, though. Sometimes it's hard to tell which way is up. For most of my artwork that doesn't really matter but I guess life is different.
-
I don't mean to say that I have an important role or that the protector should protect me. They probably have their pick of targets right now. The protector is probably better off looking after someone that is not known to the scum anyway. They wouldn't be able to protect me forever and I don't expect them to. The only reason I brought it up at all is that it was strange and points to the fact that the scum have some way of knowing things that we should take into consideration in factoring the odds of certain scenarios. Someone came after me on a fishing expedition. It was rather sloppy and done with what were claimed to be good intentions but it just didn't feel right to me. Since we have to vote for someone, and I've already stated my feeling on the Dan lynch, that's where my vote is going to go right now. Vote: Anne Truitt
-
It's funny how some of you factor the odds. An investigator comes out after a few of us are dead and you think it statisitcally impossible that they could be scum pulling a trick. But I come forward merely saying that the scum blocked me twice and somehow it's much more likely that I'm scum. I'm not saying this for anyone to claim to me, and I don't want them to do so. So if any of you were thinking about it, don't. I'm saying it because I am most likely dead soon and I think it makes the scum pulling a fake investigator ploy more likely. I don't think we can assume how they would have found out about me. It might be a role cop or there might be some twist we can't see. The role cop may even be a day action. I don't know. I really don't know but it makes no sense for them to conitinue to block me after the first night if they didn't have a strong reason to believe I had a role. I contacted no one privately and, until today, no one contacted me. I fear that others may be claiming to large numbers of people. The investigator certainly seems to have gotten around if everything I've heard is true. If you've been contacted by them, ask yourself "Why did they claim to me when they already have two supposedly clear people to talk to?" It stinks and I'm not afraid of being called suspicious for saying so.
-
Carl, what exactly makes you think I'm suspicious? That I'm disagreeing with you? I'm surprised because you seemed to be trying to think for yourself and now you don't give a reason for that. That's not very bright. Even assuming that they are cleared and trustworthy, it doesn't mean that their judgment is infallible. Think for yourself or we might as well have just let a spambot in here. Considering I've been blocked two nights in a row, the odds might be better than you think. The scum know that much so there's not a lot of harm in saying it. Since they can't block me for a third time in a row tonight according to the rules, they're going to have to figure out something different for me tonight. There has to be a reason that they wouldn't have moved on after the first night. Right now I'm torn. There is a chance I've been wrong about John and Eva, and their investigator is real. I have too many doubts about the whole thing, though, to just let them be. The whole thing stinks. I don't trust either of them but I don't think the rest of you are going to go after them. But I'm not loving Dan either. The thing that holds me back from voting for him is the ease with which his lynch seems to be going. He seems to be an easy target.
-
Please don't reply to me within my own quote, it won't come up when I reply back. It's not "recycling my own words". If I said anything similar before, I still believe it and am letting everyone know. I said plenty of new things there that had to do with your investigator that I could not have said earlier. What exactly are you accusing me of? You talked as if Ellsworth were proven town. Even if your investigator exists and their results are true, that is not a fact even if they happen to be in contact with her. It's stupid for you to have even brought it up the fact that you and the investigator were in contact with her if you were town. As for your "wanting to hear from me", is that your way of fishing for something? If it is, there's only one way you could know even a little about that and it would point to your investigator either not getting a correct result or being a lie. One of the greatest reasons I don't believe the investigation results is that everything you say is strange, Eva. It just doesn't seem right. I think there was bussing going on and it would explain the weirdness of John's voting. Miscounting is a stupid excuse when the numbers involved could be counted on fingers. It should have and would have been more important to him. I've seen bussing done on the first day. It's not some mythical notion that would never ever happen.
-
I find this extremely interesting. How is John playing the same way as Tony? John, which nights were the two of you investigated on? There are ten of us remaining. How many days do you think it would take us to figure out if it was a lie? How many scum do you think there are? They have every reason to lie about this. The bottom line is that I'm skeptical. My top two suspects have both been investigated and found innocent. John was miraculously saved from lynching two days in a row. The person he might have been trying to bus/save the first day: Eva. And the investigator came forward right after Jo asked them to. Seems convenient. Carl, I appreciate your effort, but I think saying that scum always do something or never do something is not concrete proof of anything. And day one is a perfect day for a bus, especially if neither of the bussers get voted out. I'll have to go over the voting record yesterday again and see if I can find anything.
-
That was the result of my scrutiny. I think John is scum. I appreciate your own conclusion and I thank you for taking the time to provide it. I don't know exactly what John was doing with his voting but it doesn't seem like the actions of a townie.
-
I don't think the momentum of two people voting would justify his switch if he were town. If he was only concerned with saving himself, he didn't need to change his vote at all. If he was concerned with either trying to save Eva as well (possibly a bus gone bad) or trying to get someone else killed (momentum gaining on Ellsworth), it seems much more scummy. I don't buy this at all. We aren't talking about large numbers. I'd like to believe that we can all count to 3. If you were doing any math at all, you should have arrived at the correct answer. This should have been important enough for you to devote the attention. And now you just move on and, sensing the next greatest suspect, start right in to shifting focus to Tony. I note also that you were careful not to start the vote for him. Vote: John McKraken His behavior and voting pattern is more than enough for me.
-
I don't think looking at who seemed cross at Sol in thread will reveal any motive for his murder. I think the scum chose someone either based on a guess at who they believed them to be, because they might have seen behavior that indicated a night action (which I don't see myself looking back), or just chose a name they liked somewhat randomly. We should remember that scum would not have much more to base a kill on than knowing who's not on their side. Deeper meaning to the first days, when it is likely that there were few private conversations going around and hardly anything substantive in public conversation, will probably not be found. How could you have much confidence about anyone the first day? I agree that voting for the person you find most likely to be scum is best, but perhaps your statement makes you sound more sure of people's alignments than you should be. Your theory that the scum wouldn't have placed a hammer vote I find unlikely. It would not have put the scum changing the vote in much scrutiny considering a few of us do feel that, even though statistically speaking lynching town is far more likely in the early days of these situations, early lynches are important to playing this game. I think it would have been fairly easy to justify placing a hammer vote by a scum in most situations. The only reason I see for scum just doing enough to tie the vote is to protect one of their own while drawing the least amount of attention. By not resolving anything yesterday with a firm affiliation of one candidate, we can't judge the actions of people as clearly. The vote is less likely to be scrutinized if a town person did not die because of it. It is also possible that more than one candidate may have been scum. I'll be back shortly, I have to find a quote. And back. John's vote is really interesting to me. When John changed his vote from Eva to Ellsworth to "prevent his lynch" Eva had three votes and was already tied with John. All that changed with his vote was that It was Ellsworth tied with him instead of Eva. It was only later when Frank voted that Eva came back into what was now a three-way tie. Neither vote was backed up by any reason other than attempting to save himself. I'd like John to try to elaborate on this and see what comes of it. I find his voting pattern the most odd.
-
Certainly, if we'd lynched town, we'd be worse off today. But I can't help but wonder if we missed out on lynching scum because some people intentionally tied up the vote yesterday. I think that scrutinizing the vote yesterday may be more fruitful in catching scum than anything else today. That's where I know I'll be looking and I invite you all to do the same. More eyes on the problem, more likely the solution will be seen.
-
The substance of what I've said has added up to more than that. Is it possible you read through the day in a hurry? I don't think I've been "flying under the radar" any more than anyone else. I've said things that were relevant to discussion. If you really feel what I've done is suspicious, vote for me. That's what the voting system is there for. The only person I feel comfortable in placing a vote for right now is Ellsworth Kelly. Her statement when she first voted for John about it being between that and no lynch was a false statement considering that according to Rule 12, everyone must vote. That necessitates a lynch unless we had a very unlikely tie vote. Sure she explained the reasons she voted for John after some prying from Dan, but she never really explained this original reasoning. It just seems like she didn't have a good reason to begin with but thought of one (or was coached by a teammate) when someone else wasn't satisfied with her first one. Vote: Ellsworth Kelly
-
You mean the round tile that's on the floor? It's called perspective, a concept I would expect fellow artists to understand.
-
I hope you guys are on our side. I'd hate for such keen observation skills to be available to the scum. Untitled! Here, boy! Anyone seen my dog? Everytime I call his name my goldfish named "untitled" answers instead.
-
What picture are you looking at? I've got no hands. I'm completely unarmed. My art looks like myself and is composed of boxes that appear to be screwed into a wall. I believe it's called "Untitled" like all my works (and my dog).
-
Poor Craig. Let's lynch the perpetrators. It's never too early for pingpong.
-
Minimal Mafia Confirmation & Discussion Thread
Donald Judd replied to Hinckley's topic in LEGO Mafia and Role-Play Games
Confirmed.