It doesn't seem to me that Hollis is doing this out of self-preservation. After all, none had come out to accuse him of wrongdoing aside from myself, just now. I can only assume this is some kind of joke? Apologies, but I have no sense of humour.
No, the problem is that he maintains a vote on Dan, yet expresses willingness to see the Spectre lynched. The original vote on Dan by Spectre was useless; unproductive, as helpful as voting for an inanimate statue. Why does he persist, and why does he persue Spectre? I see no reason to not be edgy when one's life is on the line in such surprising form, so I cannot hold this against her. My question is- do you? Does Mason? Does Captain Carnage, who considered the point originally?
Personally, I find the most damning thing about the Spectre her own lack of willingness to present a case. We are in a position where we must hunt, and on her part, the hunting is not happening!
In any case, I have, to put it bluntly, no interest in hammering anyone until all participants in this discussion have weighed in. However, it would be unwise to presume that I'm unwilling to do what needs to be done when the time comes, Comedian.
<->
The Nite Owl has crept up on me during my speech, much like the spies of feudal Nippon. A pedestrian explanation but a servicable one which I will not refute. ##Unvote for the time being. I find myself at a loss to present a stronger case on any but the Spectre. Nonetheless, I wish questions in the above text answered.
