@InflatablePie:
At the time you
first
called me out for "defending FG so hard today" & being his possible partner for it I had just recently:
Called FakeGod out on what I thought was a breadcrumble that didn't match his claim (essentially I was ready to vote him if he didn't have a good explanation).
Did the research and pointed out the possible breadcrumbles from Chronopie.
And then say "I don't want to lynch FakeGod" after he explained my misinterpretation of Timeater.
Essentially you tried to make the connection between me & FakeGod much larger than it was after I decided I wasn't for the lynch. Discrediting the people against the lynch by finding ways to connect them to the lynchee/exaggerate their opposition to the lynch comes off as scummy to me.
----
Interestingly, InflatablePie & Brandi have both taken very easy stances on FakeGod for scum to take provided he's town. InflatablePie essentially has used the "he's scummy now thus we should lynch him despite meta" which is easy for scum to fall back onto as their reasoning after a mislynch. Brandi on the otherhand has taken a "well he was scummy in this game too, thus I don't think he's scum", which is an easy way to go "I told you so!" if he's lynched. InflatablePie & Brandi both have shakey meta stances. InflatablePie's tries to justify ignoring it, Brandi's tries to justify relying on it.
However, going back to what I asked charter about the Brandi v. Pom exchange, I disagree with his answer. Brandi finally took the time to stick her neck out and both defend a player and attack a player for once. Pom initially tries to bite back at Brandi by attacking Brandi's voting pattern instead of actually defending against the point.
----
@MaxMouse You've faded into the background. Take a more solid stance, you've had enough time.