Right then, Surye case:
Post #102: Defence of known scum Cream. Not what led me to suspect him on my initial read, since I didn't have any idea that Cream was scum at the time, but worth noting.
Post #116: This is just a horrible post. He's so obviously misrepresenting BA's point it's unreal. Pretty much just throwing dirt at him for no reason.
Post #295: Revisionist history ITP. Megatheory is acting like you're still voting Sir T? More like you're acting like you never voted him in the first place. Just because you hastily went back on your Sir T vote when you came under a little pressure doesn't mean you didn't make it. Mega has every right to scrutinise your reasons for voting even if you changed your mind about doing so.
Also, "are you even paying attention to this game" "this post is full of silly"; this kind of ad hominem is all over the place in Surye's posts in this game.
I completely agree with Sir T's
Post #362.
Post #635: Why would you make this post? What do you hope to achieve by it? springlullaby's
#973 is an excellent summary of exactly what is so scummy about this post, and I'm not finding any response to it from Surye anywhere.
Post #750: No, really. How is "Are you even paying attention to this game?" not ad hominem? Also not liking the way he characterises a lot of Muerrto's attacks as "misdirection" here, very OMGUSy. Especially when the points Muerrto made were perfectly true, you were engaging in ad hominem, and you were defending Empking. I don't even think the latter is in any way scummy, because your defence of Empking was perfectly justified, but the fact that your response is not to say that but to deny everything is.
Post #755: "I think you were asking the question, "How is surye scummy" rather then "Is surye scummy" when you did your analysis, so you founds things without considering the value, and focusing on certain parts and not seeing or valuing other parts that invalidate that analysis."
Sounds like an awfully convenient way to discredit a case against you without addressing any of the actual points made in it. Seriously, does this sentence actually say
anything
?
Post #1124: Not true. Xtoxm's original point, that kuribo looked like scum attacking the mislynch to look good, was a much better point that kuribo's defense of "I replaced in after the mislynch", which is totally irrelevant. Both of them descended into insult-flinging pretty soon after that, but Xtoxm had the higher ground initially as far as I'm concerned. This Xtoxm wagon was absolutely bogus.
Post #1287: Surye is very late on the al4xz wagon Day 3, having spent most of the day pushing for a Wall-E lynch.
Post #1409: "I don't like the claim, but it's ballsy" Is it just me, or is that not something you'd say about a claim if you didn't already know it was false? I mean, it's not "ballsy" for a cop to claim cop when they're about to be lynched, it's "basic common sense".
I don't have anything else to point to from the following days; the Wall-E and farside lynches were pretty much just blatantly obvious, and I'd more or less expect anyone, town or scum, to be going along with them. And being one of the three players to actually bother voting on D6 is a point in his favour too.
I'm going to do a thorough readthrough of the other four remaining players too, and also look through Cream, al4xz and Netlava's posts for connections, but these are the reasons why Surye was looking so bad to me on my first read of the thread.
