I'm bored enough. Selectively, though, because no way am I ISO'ing 15 players at 1am.
bea
Where I left things:
Day Two [15th vote out of 26, sideline vote, nutella was leading 5-3 vs Long Con]
Disclaimer: It is impossible and agonizing to search ISO for "LA" instead of "nutella". I know it's veterans' preference for nutella's nickname, but it's a fraking pain in the ass come ISO time.
~ claims to pay attention to her suss'ers, but needs more time to decide
~ interacts with nutella by asking her reads and her stance on SVS suspecting her
- comments, I believe, on this point made by SVS being truthful and potentially relevant, but still would prefer to wait
- votes LoRab, calling it a leap of faith; background for going with this option was where? apparently voted by following Black Rock's take on LoRab?
Day Three [20th vote out of 25, 6th vote on Nerolunar, LoRab long claimed and was likely now at "no votes"]
- goes with Nerolunar, in light of LoRab's amnesty claim
- [Day Four] claims Glorfindel is a null for her, just like Nerolunar was on Day Three
I find evidence to be highly unfavorable for bea. The biggest issue I have is that she just admitted to have voted a null read. A second big issue I would have is that she constantly claims to have "done what she could" after both these lynches. And what she did was not much: following BR, apparently, in a vote for LoRab, then, as I've said, adding a vote to a player she had no strong read on. To be honest, even the points I labelled as null can turn slightly bitter, would you evaluate how bad this makes bea look. Nutella reluctance can seem highly compatible with waiting in tension to see which way the Day Two lynch might have gone. Incidentally, found the Cylon Amnesty Law to be "good" -- which was then used up by LoRab to mess up the Day Three lynch.
Day Four (missed vote)
- reads Glorfindel null, mentioning it's similar to reading Nerolunar null (later,
rebuttal on contributing to Nero mislynch)
Day Five [15th vote of 18, 2nd vote on sig, not major wagon]
- questions Polo's early vote for Glorfindel instead of staying consistent with wanting zebra ideally
- applauds Glorfindel's
stance on the claiming pressuring;
reinforces idea that Glor's posts are influencing a positive look
- concludes not being sold on Glor, compared to Polo and G-Man
Day Six [20th vote of 20, 7th vote on Glorfindel, first wagon]
- inactive, asks Silverwolf to clarify if her suss on Glor is based on not claiming and not rebutting in a satisfactory way
- votes Glorfindel, because she sees it as fulfilling the task of having pressured Glorfindel into claiming and being checked for cylonitis
- [post-non-lynch] reads Glor good Cylon
Day Seven [missed vote]
- questions Obscure on why she read Glorfindel bad
- questions Dex on why he reads Wilgy good and Glorfindel bad
- asks Glorfindel who to lynch instead of him
- quasi-sympathetic rebuttals in an apparent exchange with Glorfindel
(1),
(2)
Once again, I will admit and clarify that, after Day Three, there was a circumstance (can't retrace the post) in which I believed bea to have hinted at being a type of role. More exaclty, I believed her to have hinted at being one of the original Final Five characters - except that, unless such a character would also get revealed as an F5 in this game, that character/role would otherwise not be a Cylon and remain within human race ranks, right?
But since this is besides any regular perception of her game, her ISO still comes back rather spotty.
Her dynamic in reading Glorindel fluctuates wildly, in ways that could almost be interpreted negatively: uninterested when Glorfindel wasn't too much of a hot topic yet (Day Four); appealing to Glorfindel's quality writing and stances, when he became a hot topic(Day Five); switching from having nothing to say on him to voting him in a manifest to rally with the rest of his lynchers (Day Six); back to treating Glorfindel as possible good and questioning just about anyone who still pushes for his lynch (Day Seven).
Probably my greatest ping, right now, has to do, ironically, with two stances on voting a Cylon who claimed that show up to be quite different.
This is her rebuttal on why she voted Nerolunar, on a Day when LoRab had claimed, Day Three. According to her, she rallied with the rest NOT to pile on LoRab, but to create a clear second wagon, whose lynch would confirm LoRab's immunity.
At the time I voted Neuro I was at work and skimming the thread. As I understood what was going down, we were trying to split the vote between lorab and someone the thread suspected so that we could confirm that lorab was cylon. There were lots of votes on lorab neuro was the leading CW. I went with the flow of the town.
Here is her stance on voting Glorfindel, Day Six. According to her, the rally this time should be to precisely pile on the claimee, as to verify his immunity.
I'm confused again. Don't we want glor to be in the lead since he claimed today? So that we know his survival is because he claimed? Wasn't that like the reason some of us were putting pressure on people to claim in the first place?
I feel like I said the same thing last lynch and I think I'm even more confused today as to what people's motivations are.
voting glorbecause I thought that was the point of making him claim and because I'm stuck in linki
So to recap, on the Day a likely good Cylon survived, her focus was to help build a second bonfire (which mis-...wait for it...fired). On the Day a likely bad Cylon survived, her focus was to add to that Cylon's tally. Correlating this with her moodswinging attitude towards Glorfindel, this could easily translate into bussybus for Glorfindel, to look principled.
Or maybe this rather correlates her with sig, who was clear second wagon on Day Six, and yet she didn't apply the same "Nerolunar" lynchlogic to sig as well. ...except she did want to lynch sig... after which (half an hour later): nothing.
I'm planning to look into a few more names to see if they spike above this standard of suspicion, but this to me is not "nub" bea. This is fishy.