First off, sorry for being away for a while, but school + suddenly feeling sick + other minor crap...well, you know the drill.
Anyway, first off, Wall's of Texts already? Geez, I've been purposely trying to avoid them and I thought it was stated "keep them limited!" Argh!
...ok, that's out of my system.
I was trying to justify, for lack of a better word, Xanth's actions on calling El-Cid the aggressive one mostly cause that was how
I perceived it. I'm not strongly defending him the way I jumped to Shale's defense (where neither of us was scum, mind) in Suicide Mafia. I'm mostly saying "I think by this he means this" and hoping that wasn't Excal's only reason. Yes, yes, Xanth can explain himself, but
Excal has submitted a reason for voting Xanth since I requested one...and his reason is basically "I don't have a good one cause its day 1." Hate to say it, but I really can't argue that; I'm guilty of the same thing and its hurting me cause I chose a worse target, it seems, but yeah, on day 1, who goes first is pretty random. Someone does something remotely "suspicious" and it escalates from there. You have to spark conversation somehow. Apparently, my act that made me suspicious did exactly that...no, this does NOT justify my actions, I'm just indicating the irony of the situation I put myself in.
No, I didn't mean to get people to target me, I just wanted to break the joke phase; I just apparently went about it in the dumbest way possible. I can't justify my attack on Delta beyond "Meh, lets go after the guy who hasn't posted" and it was a bonehead move, and has gotten me painted. I'm not trying to paint myself as a target (if I'm reading Delta's post right)
As I noted, Wishie Washieness was more me having odd train of thought, and deciding post it down. I mean, Marge did that same thing in the episode with Jay Sherman and this is Simpson's Mafia!
*letter to Jay*
"Marge, is this a pimple or a boil?"
"Homer can't you see I'm...oh, darn, now you just made me write that!"
*continue letter*
...ok, joke aside, I probably should have worded my entire post better.
Anyway, defense off, onto other stuff!
Xanth's standing out to me right now partially cause of what looks like finger pointing. No one else at the moment really sticks out in an particular way. I don't know how he plays in the past, but...well, I can't really much to what Tom said. I'm really not liking this "Meeple's more suspicious, but I'm voting for Tom!" thing. If I truly DID feel suspicious to him, more so than Tom, why isn't the vote on me?
That and the fact that I have a survival instinct...
##Vote: XanthAnd no, Xanth; scum can fly under the radar in a variety of ways. One such way is Smoke screening, as in, post a lot, but say very little. I feel like your posts are, as Tom noted, mostly fluff.
Other stuff:
Delta Posting = Good! Also seems like he had legit RL issues to boot. Also good to know he's working on a somewhat irregular (no offense) time zone, so yeah. His one post doesn't really give me much of any vibes; he came in late to the game, and has to work from there, so its understandable.
Alex hasn't said a lot, but from what I recall, Alex tends to not say a lot on Day 1 cause there isn't much to say. Day 2 is when he starts to actually do stuff. What he has said, though, doesn't stick out.
I don't like Strago saying "Meeple's Post si a retcon to generate discussion!" Um, shit, yes, it was done for that purpose? What do you think the point of a "pressure vote" is? Why do you think I said "Its as good a place to start as any" (even if it apparently was a horrible place to start)?
Cid bugs me for claiming I had poor reasons to justify my votes:
-Vote stays on Meeple for the Delta vote, the poor attempt to justify it, and him having nothing useful to say in response to the pressure. "I'm apparently good at painting myself a target." Sure, but being Meeple doesn't give you a free pass to make scummy errors. Meeple and Xanth look like our best options for lynching today.
That's not what I said. That "I'm good at painting myself a target" is just a side point. Great way to strawman the post. I explained why I did it, and again, how do you justify a "lets get the ball rolling" vote beyond that? In fact, you've in the past slammed me for not taking any sort of initiative, and voted me on it in the past. Metagaming? Yes, but now you're contradicting your own advice. I really don't follow this logic here; I try to do SOMETHING, and now suddenly I feel suspicious cause I did it poorly? This feels more like "Meeple's playing idiotically, therefor scum!" rather than "Meeple's playing scummy."
How am I suppose to justify a vote that, as I stated in the post I voted on him, existed purely to help pressure him? Bad tactic, maybe! But I said why I did it, and you're saying "Not good enough, SCUM!" Its putting someone's back against the wall for a minor slip, I feel.
