Peng the Just

We've lynched eliminators twice in a row (woot, woot) and, assuming my vote counting is correct, only two people have not voted for either: bort and alv

HA! Called it! EDIT: just realized there wasn't a CC kill. bridgeboy was thrown off the caboose.

I love this one.

I got ENFP for lightsong

If you were in charge of the cosmere, who would Renarin marry?

No. No it wasn't. That's not a thing. Not even a little bit. Keep in mind I had to place my preliminary vote BEFORE dow's evidence was brought up because I had to go to work and was only able to get back on because I happened to get off work early. But let's compare evidence, just for fun. Day1: Misinformation is slightly suspicious, but could just as easily have been a misunderstanding. Day2: Absolutely nothing suspicious here. Day3: This would be kinda suspicious, but I honestly don't remember this happening. Might someone be able to provide a link? Day4: this is the best piece of evidence Neo gathered against Dow. Day5: Day5 actions point more towards Neo, as we KNOW he voted for an innocent. The rest of it seems to be calling Dow out on lack of activity. Now, let's look at Dow's points. He actually makes some good points here. As someone who has played as both, I can guarantee being an eliminator can make a normally less active player more active. As far about the bit about poke votes, I only find this slightly suspicious. It can be a good way to hide your voting motive, but it can also be a way to invoke the participation of less actives. Promising analysis and not having any sounds like someone who actually doesn't have proof. The bit about claiming bandwagons when there are none is good evidence.

Here's where you misunderstand me: His confidence itself didn't make me suspicious. The huge disparity between his evidence and his amount of confidence did. The reason I asked for a reference on that is because he just posted it as a generic quote, and it didn't show as specifically quoting ren. That can easily be recreated in BBCODE (see below example) and I wanted to be sure, because what he was saying was contrary to my understanding of the rules. I was thinking about buying a medkit for myself. EDIT: including screenshot of what I'm talking about See how the first quote shows as being from Gamma and the Second is just a generic quote? That's why I asked for a reference

Thank you for being civilized and specific about what about my post bothered you. I didn't mean to offend and will be more careful in the future. Would you prefer a version that isn't gender specific?

That reminded me of this: https://youtu.be/nWqW3HWJsr8?t=39

Here's the big reasoning: Neo had nothing on dow. Nothing. Dow had something on Neo, but even before I saw it I was suspicious. Neo was too fast and too confident.

Pretty clear choice for me today. Neo

Overall, I find Dow's points to be far more convincing. I'm going to leave my vote where it is.

Here's the thing, Neo. You are more confident in this than you have any right to be, based on the above evidence. It's something, that's for sure, but it's very far from conclusive. Why, based on that alone are you almost 100% certain? your adamance just makes me more suspicious of you right now. Edit: do you have a source handy for this?

Hmm... I'll buy it. aanwolf neo. EDIT: I'd love to stay and see your explanation, but I have to go for the day.

How confident are you? If he ends up being innocent, will you put your neck up for lynching?

That sounds like an effort to make it cheaper to make everyone lose, Aanwolf.

Warning! MAJOR SPOILER AHEAD!