Yo! Scotty, clam down buddy, It's still night time
Ok, time to get out the grease and do some debunking. Going through your post and quoting properly sounds like a nightmare, so I'll just copy paste stuff and respond.
"We don't know exactly when Uzbeethoven recruited, but we can assume it was some time in that time frame."
-are we to assume that the time of the hosts post was not the same time of the recruitment? I thought they were posted for a reason.
"I imagine Wilgy running out into the street with his pants around his ankles shouting that he found Narnia. "
-and it was beautiful.
"This is probably tin-foiling, but my highlighted line there is equally apt when comparing it to dead Bubbles' recent post explaining that she was, in fact, emotionally invested in this game. My feeling is that she lamented of this fact in chat, and her teammates would know of this. DrWilgy, perhaps, is echoing this sentiment since it was based in reality."
-or maybe I'm sympathetic, and I feel that gauging someones emotional limit is wrong.
"He then does a long response to timmer's philosophy, and really lays it on. Attempting to distance from a Bubbles lynch."
-Does this not match anything I've done previous? Unfurl was one of my earliest votes this game because her philosophy is in disagreement with my own. Exploring more options, opening discussion, and trying to solve this game by becoming involved with other players isn't distancing oneself from a lynch, It's playing mafia.
"Nice catch of phrasing there at the end."
-Autocorrect is a dirty dirty girl, and I wasn't dancing around the point that I was defending Bubbles. It's obvious that I was, phrasing of what I did is irrelevant here, because we could all see that.
"
But why defend her at all? What changed from Day 4 to Day 5 that would make you see her in a different light?
Ah...there it is. Very...convenient timing, wouldn't you say? 
"
-Because lynching someone I believe to be neutral or civ is wrong. If I see and believe that we are about to kill a neutral or civ, I will defend them. Similarly, so everyone knows i'm not talking out of my ass, I stated that I would use my vote to save Golden (which ended up failing). The difference between day 4 and day 5? Unfurl's death. I explained it many times, but I still think, Unfurl's death was meant to frame Bubbles. It didn't sit right with me, it also didn't sit right with me how no one would defend Bubbles, so I thought there had to be something wrong.
"Actually, if you look at the positions, position 1 is the the strongest position for him, since he can't die. We knew that position 2 was a bad position, so that's not news."
-I disagree with your opinions on what is the strongest. In position 2, he can't dye via lynch, and he uses our strength against us.
"Why is he defending her so hard? Even if he were civ-minded, come on man, it's 4 hours til lynch. What does he have to lose by just letting it slide. Also, would an unrecruited player be defending her this hard?"
-I don't think I can express the fact that I thought she was neutral any harder. Why would I allow a neutral die, over someone I thought to be a baddie?
"
She had not really defended herself even before that point. That's what made her appear, and reveal to be, so scummy.
You are assuming that Umbreon had no other powers messing around with the night kill. Also, if you don't believe she was
We don't know exactly when she was recruited, that's just when BR posted the recruitment. Also, you sure are backtracking with these timestamps. VERY guilty, my man.
Also:
a) TinyBubbles had been posting the same way, in chunky schedules all game. If you recall she went almost an entire day not defending herself on Day 4, only to show up immediately after her mis-lynch to apply some lipstick and go "oh, that was weird."
b) why on earth would she care about setting you up? If she were a goner anyway, what purpose would that achieve?
c) you're putting so much effort into the time stamps, that, again, it drips with guilt."
-Her defense was her explaining that she didn't know what was happening, what made her appear is that people didn't believe it was genuine. No, I don't believe that there were other powers messing with the
lynching, not night kill, and there's no evidence to make me believe different. Are you to assume that the Host wouldn't tell us of recruitment the time of recruitment? That wouldn't make sense. What's wrong with backtracking with timestamps? You've done the same thing right here. Timestamps help prove a point by supplying a logical time frame.
a) 2 hours is not immediately
b) Getting a mislynch on me. Which is still good for their team.
c) how so?
"'I posted her defense 6 min before the day 5 recruitment (and that's not including the time it took to write it).'
How specific. Is this the same defense you mentioned you didn't have time to write in a post 3 hours and 25 minutes before?"
-yes, I don't understand what you are reaching for Scotty. How is my use of time incorrect or scummy?
"And at the end of your [slightly unwarranted and manic] defense, you start putting the blame on SVS.
Let's say you for a second that you meant well, you're unrecruited/civ, just trying to be the keeper of the peace. You see some good in Bubbles, all before she turns baddie in Day 5. Let's say your theory is correct, you think she's genuine, hindsight is 20/20..a good chunk of people suspected her enough to vote her Day 4 (even you say you were suspicious) and 16 people didn't like her enough to not vote her. You felt like being the knight in shining armor, just in case she was good.
All of this doesn't answer the resounding question:
IF YOU ARE UNRECRUITED OR CIV, WHAT COULD YOU POSSIBLY GAIN BY DEFENDING HER SO HARD?"
-A lynch on a baddie, instead of an unrecruited. I will always baddie hunt. A mislynch on both a civ and and unrecruited are bad, and we have discussed this before. Some players were even wanting to lynch others because of this philosophy. I don't plan on sitting back while I see something bad happening.
S~V~S wrote:I did not respond to it since I had already responded to the shorthand version, plus I saw a statement here, not a question. You have not been voting for me for "a while now" you voted for me two lynches ago, and had your vote on Timmer most of the past day until DH asked you to switch it.
This game is NOT an open choice environment. And I don't think my preference for being a baddie is a secret from anyone here. If "liking being bad" is criteria for being bad in any given game, I would be screwed EVERY game. It is so well known that I like being bad that I actually think I would be a liability for a baddie recruiter, like I was in RM# when I was recruited by Reywas. I was taking suspicion from both Epi & DH from fairly early in the game. So take what you will about my current recruitment status from that.
And re Golden, that is how I tend to Mafia. I see something I suspect and I go pretty hard after them.
As for your other thoughts, I am sorry that Unfurl died. Other than Roxy I am probably the last person here to kill Unfurl. She is a gentle presence, and I think we need more of her, not less of her.
And had I been bad, and known Bubbles was gonna flip bad, i would have voted her, and I would have voted hella earlier than I did, as would, I think, pretty much anyone else playing, so this is not really WIFOM territory.
Linki @ Roxy, yeah I noticed that too. But why would she make herself come up as bad?
Open recruitment means this is an open choice environment... Players have the choice to choose who they submit entries to.
for the record i probably wouldn't have voted gman, russ, or golden because they seem to be genuine.
Great result.
I'm glad my feelings about her reaction to the unfurl lynch ended up being true.