The Wander Island Incident - Night Four - Five For One [13/21]

I know we don't have anything yet from today to go off of, and, honestly? Sai didn't give us a lot to work with on D1.

Why do you say this?

Well, it's-- hm. On review there's more content than I thought, so why... Oh! I think I get it, but unfortunately, it is Gremlin Brain.

No read as yet, though my gremlin brain tends to turn "no read, but is keeping things moving" into "plausible townie," so. grains of salt, and all that.

Sai is a counterpart to "people what keep things moving are plausible townies." That is, on D1, Sai did not act in a way that I personally interpreted as "keeping things moving," and had a relatively mild, uh. vernacular? Word Use Style Thing. so even though they provided a lot of responses and analysis, none of them stuck with me, and nothing about what they did struck me as "applying pressure." Which I guess would turn into a potential scum-read? In the sort of, being-active-without-drawing-attention way. Though... the actual content they put out read as townish, which, I. guess is what scum tries to do. hm.

Didn't think this is where I would end up when I started writing this, but. here we are.

Like, the thing that sticks out to me the most is, naturally, their vote on Schazer, which, frankly, Schaz? that was a vote deserved, at least at the time it was supplied. But that's part of the issue, here: Schaz had been acting unhelpful and contrarian throughout most of D1, but never actually gained much of a spotlight, which in hindsight feels... almost too safe a vote? and Sai never unvoted Schaz, even after Schaz started providing actual opinions of relative substance, which also feels sketch? in that, committing to an action draws attention and questions; voting for Schaz at the time it was done was relatively safe (#192), but then when Schazer did appear and start expressing opinions, Sai opted to not unvote, which would have prompted questions: why the switch, who to switch to; things that would attract attention and be points of potential discussion.

On top of that, we have this sequence of assertions:

Show Content

Spoiler

Adding a break since this isn't addressing a quote exactly, but I'm in the 'almost always lynch' camp, including/especially D1. Again, not going to go too much into it, but the lynch is our best info tool and only reliable weapon, so any sort of not-lynch (almost ever) is essentially just trying to lean on powers, which isn't mafia.

I don't mind lynching Third Party.

Hunting for mafia is literally just based on psychological profiling. Role stuff just goes on top of this. The lynch is both the town's best source of information in that it's a public cop, and its most reliable weapon since barring a vigilante it's how, y'know, scum actually dies. More importantly, having a lynch shows us more about how people are interacting with each other. eg, seeing who seemed to 'know' that someone was town, or became emphatically in favor of a lynch after it was already assured, etc.

(emphasis mine)

It's like... yes? I agree with all of these things? but saying them out loud? and then not following through? paints you in kind of a negative light, I think??? It just. feels hypocritical, though not in-and-of-itself scummy, but. Not Seeming Outright Scummy is basic advanced scum tactics, so, uh. yeah.

Now that is selective quoting. In fairness to a fuller picture of events, we do also have:

I think that Schazer was aggressively nonproductive and tried to remain content free long after it was appropriate. I think that asking to be shot was abnormal. I think that it's actually kinda weird that people would post that they'd want to shoot them, but not also vote for them.

I'd actually be okay with lynching Q too, but I think that pressuring a potential lynch on Schazer now would tell us more than just adding another vote on Q would.

Which is true! I completely understand where Sai's coming from with this. It just. stopped being true after a point, and I'm not clear why, beyond that point, Sai did not pursue a Q lynch.

What I'm trying to say here is: wow yeah I was way wrong to say there wasn't much to go on. Thanks for the catch, yo


...Y'know, I'm still not clear on how "everyone on a D1 Lynch (or, on this particular D1 Lynch?) would definitely be a townie" tracks, especially after saying something like that out loud. But that feels incidental at this point. Not sure where to take that train of thought, anyway.