As did a couple of others. I called everyone out on this. You call it a poop vote now, so I'm assuming you too don't believe the narration has anything to do with my actual role. I mean do people honestly think the narrator would intentionally try to incriminate me? How is that balanced for you? He's sure made my life harder, but George Costanza doesn't give up easily. Just ask every woman who's turned me down.
I don't know what the word "pinger" means, especially in this context. So I'll refrain from comment until you clarify please.Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2017 9:50 amSpoiler: show
Jackie was gracious in his reception of George's little prod here. This exchange is a bit of a pinger.
Just a thought for you: after Elaine all but sealed his deal confirming she'd tracked him, he went down shouting me as his top suspect.Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2017 9:50 am Color-coded stances analysis
Jackie had a lot more to say about George than the other three people he stuck in this pile. He threw shade for George's history for "vouching", suggesting it may be indicative of TMI. It's plausible that Jackie himself was engaging in TMI here if George is his teammate. Relating to the point made by Frank, the portion about the Estelle kill is a little bizarre. I find myself wondering if this was an intentional dropping left by Jackie Con as a distraction, because it's really bad distancing if that's what it really is.*****
Do you honestly think that, along with the post above, is actually something a team mate would do? Do I think one of the people he named in that post is a team mate? Sure, it's more than probable. Do I think it's the name he was yelling the loudest aka me; no.
I think you should give Long Con as a player a little more credit than that. That said, no doubt he's laughing in his grave now at how he got the two most vocal posters to vote for me without a hesitation. Well done Jackie. You played it well.
Again, do we think Jackie is going to be that blatant in bussing a team mate? I don't honestly believe you believe that----deep down.Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2017 9:50 amSpoiler: show
He reinforces that George was the worst look in his analysis.
Frank. Cos it sure as hell isn't me, all my contributions have either been defending suspicion of myself in my limited time or trying to make gut reads as good as possible.Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2017 9:50 amSpoiler: show
His fake legacy mafia reads included both Costanzas and Elaine. If he stuck a teammate in here, it'd have to be a Costanza unless you're inclined to tinfoil on Elaine to the point of needing a restraint jacket. It's not necessarily true that he included a teammate.
Let's lynch Frank.
I have no idea what you're getting at. I am positive of my alignment. I'm as vanilla as Marla, your ex girlfriend. If you can't see that, what can I do to make you believe me? I'll bare it all, god damn it!Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2017 9:50 amSpoiler: show
He felt good about Jackie on Day 1. I don't fault him for that, but here it is for analytic completeness.
The green stuff isn't related to Jackie, but this is a good place talk about this separately. It's obvious that George's assertion is fallacious, and I'd expect any civilian to understand that. He said it anyway. I wonder if he is right, and he knows he is right because of his own alignment.Spoiler: show
Sorry, but with limited weekday time at my disposal, coming into a thread and finding suspicion directed at you, you’re going to want to clear yourself as much as possible to direct scum hunting efforts towards the real threats and try to get as many people believing in your claims. If you had people call you scum for fake role claims, I'm sure you'd react similarly. Don't tell me you've never been the defensive vanilla.Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2017 9:50 am The orange stuff relates to Jackie. He explained his initial positive read on Jackie and his later prod about his having gone quiet. This was in response to accusations leveled upon him by Elaine. Apart from the fallacious green stuff, he was in a defensive posture here. I don't know that I like his tone.
I'd already asked you several things in my post catch ups, I wasn't going to quote every single post every single person made. I saw Steinbrenner online, I directed a question his way to engage in discussion. No mystery.Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2017 9:50 amSpoiler: show
George questioned Mr. Steinbrenner about his positive read on Jackie. It's a fair enough question in a vacuum, though I find myself wondering why I wasn't asked the same thing -- I also had Jackie in the green zone.