AT NZENGah? I don't understand half of your post. What I got is (correct me if I'm wrong):
1. You agree with Simon for being suspicious of noobs because they are likely to get recruited, as they may be vigs.
2. Because sam made the vote and simon didn't, sam is more suspicious.
3. You misunderstood the below post, because I see nothing wrong with it.
pmchugh wrote: LSU Tiger Josh wrote:Vote Sam Vig is on the side of town even if they are a dumbass. Trying to out them right now is definitely anti-town behavior.
Yes you are just handing pointers to scum,
fos ((page 6))
i don't think that simon should be forgotten, even after our posts against sam he agreed with him, so I would like to know why he did. ((above))
I accuse sam and want simon to give an explanation, what is wrong here?
As for point 1, never try to second guess scum going after noobs as there is a small chance they were recruited is just plain silly.
And for point 2 the difference is that sam claims he made a mistake where as simon clearly means what he says. Sam may be scum but think if he was scum he wouldn't go after a vig as you would know that they are town and no-one would follow you to lynching them. Think about it seriously if you are scum is suggesting lynching a role shown to be town a good strategy? This isn't to say he is definately not scum, he could have just made the same mistake as scum, not noticing it was revealed that it was a townie who had done the kill. Either way i don't think it is a tell, just a mistake.
Simon however is different, he is doing it in a more subtle way trying to edge out the newbie's without coming out and accusing them. And it my experience (ignoring players styles) it's always the one in the background who doesn't commit to things that is scum. Townies commit on instict but scum don't because they know they are wrong, and when things go wrong they will be looked at.